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?
…and I totally agree with the point you make about face similarities.
Interesting guy Prof. Mashhad al Allaf.
He was teaching at St.Louis University (USA). Nowadays he works in Cambridge (UK) for research and works in Abu Dhabi Petroleum institute as a pro. phil.
http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=363095
Reading the first page of his personal website (below) it comes to my mind that he should support this website here.
http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ma/
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mashhad_Al-Allaf/
His fb page:
https://m.facebook.com/events/184806061585906/
Bb
Hmmm
Ran across that ad when i was finding al allaf in the UN disarmarment conference.
UK and Swedish based peace activists, oct. 2012.
http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/images/images/e-news/ksfpw12_poster.jpg
Perhaps just an accident, al allaf UN weapons control, sweden, uk, and “NO military satellites!” conference in oct 2012.
Just mentioned this for the files.
Oh someone put me out of my misery! I just can’t get my head round these relatives and their family names. Was Suhaila a Allaf or a Saffar? Sorry to be so stupid. What we really need BB as our lineage expert is a PDF of these three Iraqi (?) families with descendants and antecedents. You can even copyright it if you wish!!!!
So please take following as a stab at it and please don’t do a James at me for ballsing it up completely. I make no claim for accuracy or even quality. It needs a better brain to fit them all in but for someone like yourself it may provide you with a challenge and us with something to make sense of them all.
So why if she was married to Abdul al-Saffar, is her passport name Al Allaf? Did she revert to her maiden name or is there some other explanation. Sorry to be so dumb.
AL HILLI – Zaid (b. 1958?) and Saad (b. 1962?) sons of Kadhim (b. ?)brother of Hashim (b. 1920?)
AL ALLAF – Suhaila’s (b. 1936?) married name hence Iqbal’s (b. 1965?) maiden name before she marries Saad (when ?)
“Abdul al-Saffar, died last year from kidney problems.”
AL SAFFAR – Suhaila’s maiden name.
“Dr Ahmad al-Saffar says it is “unfortunate” investigators have been …”
” Aunt Fadwa al-Saffar preparing legal bid to become legal guardian of …”
and where do these lines of al allafs and al saffars come from? both Iraqi Shia or Iranian or Syrian or Lebanese or none of above? How come Saad and Iqbal met in Dubai, the modern “Constantinople nexus” between east and west? Was this an arranged marriage between influential families effectively or a love match? In comparison, Zaids marriage to a Catholic (surely) O’Rourke (?) appears far more unconventional – heretical even on both sides. Saad’s marriage on the face of it, and if that photograph is anything to go by, more successful than poor old Zaid who now appears to being dumped on by everyone. Hypothetically speaking, if their were spies Z appears the more likely to me, but that pure speculation on my part.
So remind me – when did Zaid get married? Did he have children? When was he divorced which presumably equates to when he moved in with Saad at the Oaken Lane address before later moving out again? I’m trying to get all these family jigsaw bits to fit into a timeline. I know all this is old hat but any help out there to nail it once and for all?
BB – Rather strangely the image accompanying the al allaf funeral article you posted @
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/05/19/iraq.main/
“Tearful Iraqis carry the casket of Sayid Mohammed al-Allaf through Baghdad streets.” states “This image is no longer available”.
Did it reveal individuals that later were thought better kept out of the public eye?
Tim
This is easy.
1) you must not think as a european/american regardibg family relations and name giving. If you do, then i understand your confusion.
2) the islamic system if given names and surnames is much easier and more clever than ours and allows us much better research into ancestry line ups.
A) surnames
Male lines will always keep their surname. Children will always keep the surname of their father’s line.
Female lines will akways keep the surname of their father and they will never adopt the name of their husband.
Born al Allaf as a female you will die as al Allaf, no matter how often you were married. However, nine of your children will ever get tge right to use their mother’s surname.
B) first and middle names
Your first name is always your given name at birth. The second name used is the first name of your father. The third name used is the first name of your grandfather. Then you coupd add the first name of your great grandfather etc.
Back to our example:
Al Allaf
Suhaila was a woman. She was born into the family of al Allaf, about 1937/38.
She will keep her name until she dies. Other al Allafs can be father/brother/cousins/nephews. However, her children will never be al Allafs.
She married al Saffar
Therefore iqbal’s name is al Saffar while Suhaila is still al Allaf.
Iqbal marries Saad in London.
Islamic right will still call her Iqbal al Saffar.
I am sure that if she has an Iraqi/uae/syrian passport, she will still be Iqbal al Saffar.
Just in london they use british law and they gave her her husband’s name al hilli. That is why she is sometimes mentioned as iqbal al hilli.
Her fathers damily: al Saffar
Her mother’s family: al Allaf
Her husband’s family: al Hilli
If they had a sun and his given first name was e.g. Mohammed,
then he would be called Mohammed Saad Kadhim al Hilli.
His daughter Zainab will usually be called Zainab S al Hilli.
Hopefully you understand this better now.
Al Allaf can only be brothers, cousins, sisters, father or nephews of Suhaila.
However, we got now UN ambassadors both in the al Hilli family, in the al Allaf family and in the al Saffar family.
We got Arab League General Secretaries in the al Allaf and in the al Hilli family.
We got Middle East journalists in the al Saffar and in the al Allaf family.
We got international politics analysts in the al Safdar, in the al Allaf and in the al Hilli family.
And we probably got intelligence contacts in all three families.
They are ideologically united as Palestine supporters, Royalists and peace keepers. Religiously they are united as Shia in the al Sistani/al Khoei group.
Tim v.
“Tearful Iraqis carry the casket of Sayid Mohammed al-Allaf through Baghdad streets.” states “This image is no longer available”
Possibly. Was Saad in Iraq in 2005 at this funeral?
We don’t know. Possibly he was there with his wife and his mother in law.
If he was there we shall not see him, should we?
Tim
Typing error
nine of your children will ever get tge right to use their mother’s surname.
Should read:
none of your children will ever get the right to use their mother’s surname.
Sorry. Like so many others I miss an edit function. It is so tough typing on a mobile phone …
Bb
from BB’s post . old news but still interesting part. the role of Germany/france moving to china/russia. (but no mention of pakistan)
Iranian nuclear program and its threat to pan-Arab security
by Ibrahim Khalil al-Allaf
Baghdad Al-Thawrah
May 28, 2001
The history of the Iranian nuclear program dates back to 1974 when Iran signed a nuclear cooperation agreement with France. In 1976 Iran signed an agreement with Germany on building two nuclear reactors in Bushehr. After the fall of the Shah in 1979 the nuclear program was temporarily suspended but it picked up again and Iran was able to build a nuclear research reactor in 1992. In 1993 China agreed to build two 300-megawatt nuclear reactors. In 1995 Iran signed an agreement with Russia under which Russia undertook to deliver two 1,000-megwatt reactors.
An article prepared by Professor Tamim Hani Khallaf was published in the Egyptian magazine Al-Siyasah al-Dawliyah [International Politics], (issue 142, October 2000). The article indicates that the most important nuclear research centers in Iran are the Nuclear Studies Center in Tehran, which was set up in 1968, the Nuclear Technology Center in Isfahan, the Nuclear Studies Center for Agriculture and Medicine in Karaj, the Nuclear Research Administration in Yezd, and the nuclear power station in Bushehr.
Iran has benefited from the collapse of the former Soviet Union. It has brought nuclear experts, obtained nuclear equipment, machinery, and technology through various means, and established relations with some [former Soviet Union] states, which helped it develop its armament programs, including nuclear armament. Iranian officials have been keen on emphasizing that Iran cannot ignore the importance of the nuclear aspect of factors connected with its national security and its strategic role in the region, particularly as some neighboring countries are trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Iranian officials are trying to follow the Zionist policy of surrounding their nuclear program with ambiguity and of continuously hinting that it is for peaceful purposes. In 1992 Iran submitted to some international pressure and permitted IAEA officials to visit its nuclear installations. It also affirmed its adherence to the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT], which it ratified in 1970.
Observers say that Iran is striving to develop its nuclear program for reasons connected with strengthening its regional position and defending its national security. They add that Iran is thus responding to what they call Iraq’s nuclear program. The Iranians realize that the US military presence in the Arab Gulf is not confined to monitoring “Iraq’s military activity but also Iran’s military activity” and that the US administration opposes Iran’s attempt to possess nuclear weapons. Although IAEA reports affirm that Iran continues to adhere to the NPT, CIA reports indicate the opposite. The launching of the Shehab-3 missile has caused apprehension among the Americans, some of whom believe that Iran is capable of acquiring a nuclear weapon and cast doubt on the IAEA reports.”
http://www.fas.org/news/iran/2001/iran-010528.htm
What is exciting is the matter of fact that al Allaf wrote this article for the al Thawra newspaper. Al Thawra is the political media of the Baath party. It was owned and censored by the party. In Syria it was Assad who did control it and in Iraq it was Saddam at tgat time (2001). The head quarters of that newspaper are in Syria.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Thawra_(newspaper)
Intrresting is also a speech regarding the funeral of assassinated cleric Sayid Mohammed al Allaf.
Quote
All the world should know that we are heading toward a catastrophe, only God knows when it ends. This is our warning.”
We knew the sides that stand behind the assassinations of imams, sheikhs, and prayers. They are the same sides that cordoned off the camp of our Palestinian brothers in al-Baladiat area to take them out of the country.
Not surprising, but fat bastard did attend Saad’s funeral.
Left side standing next to the Asian guy. Why haven’t we identified all the guys on that picture yet? I am sure that somehow we came across all of them in our previous research.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/10/29/article-0-159C46CD000005DC-90_634x436.jpg
That’s an interesting interview with prof. Al Allaf telling us what he is doing and thinking about politics.
http://m.toledoblade.com/Religion/2006/09/30/Islamic-scholar-wants-to-make-impact-beyond-UT-classes.html
There seems to be one branch of the al Allaf family from Damascus/Syria and the other one from Mosul/Iraq.
Some famous political names of the al Saffar family.
Ammar al Saffar we had already discussed.
Akeel Al Saffar , Deputy Minister of National Security Affairs, Iraq. Faculty : John G. Stoessinger (International Relations/Political Science)
Adnan al Saffar
http://uslaboragainstwar.org/gallery.php?gal=21
Bb
Great stuff.
Read this and you will understand MI6/CIA and their al Hilli/al Saffar connections, too.
This link is worth reading completely. Does it sound common with the al Hilli history? You bet, it does!
http://m.newyorker.com/archive/2005/01/24/050124fa_fact1
Quotes (note Akeel al Saffar, the senior aide of Iyad Allawi!).
After Allawi left, I went inside to talk to Sheikh Suleiman. He and two other men were sitting on black leather sofas in a room decorated with Persian rugs, faux-Hellenistic columns, and oil paintings evoking ancient Mesopotamia. One of the men was the Sheikh’s assistant; the other was Akeel al-Saffar, one of Allawi’s senior aides. The Sheikh wore a graydishdasha robe with ornate diamond-and-silver cufflinks.
The group, which was run by Allawi, had been under C.I.A. patronage since 1992. As the Sheikh told it, he and Allawi had helped prepare the way for American forces in Al Anbar province in the months before the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March, 2003, by securing agreement from Iraqi military officers not to fight coalition troops.
But the Sheikh was distracted: his assistant was holding a cell phone and reading a text message to the Sheikh, who began questioning him with consternation. The assistant reread the message several times, glowering. Saffar, the senior aide, explained that the Sheikh had been unable to retrieve his text messages for some time, and had finally asked his assistant to do it for him. One message was a death threat, warning Sheikh Suleiman that if he didn’t break with Allawi within forty-eight hours he would be killed.
The message added that an assassination team had been sent to Jordan to carry out the sentence if he failed to comply. The deadline had passed more than ten days earlier. Saffar smiled, seemingly unperturbed.
” Another old friend of Allawi’s, an Iraqi who now lives in Jordan, told me that, during a recent private reunion, Allawi had said that he was shocked, upon returning to Iraq after thirty years in exile, by the degree to which Saddam’s rule had debased Iraqi society. “He said Iraqis had become liars and cheats and murderers, and only respected brute force, and that was how he had to deal with them,” the friend recalled. In a fit of emotion, Allawi had exclaimed, “I will use brute force!”—three times, as if uttering a vow, punching one fist into the palm of his other hand.
“Iyad is a man whom the French would call ‘a man of the shadows,’ ” his cousin Ali Allawi told me in London last month. He, too, owns a home there, a gracious town house just off Kensington High Street.
He described Allawi as enigmatic and elusive, qualities he attributed to Allawi’s early career as a Baathist, followed by his years spent working with Western intelligence agencies against Saddam.
(Ed. Does the below paragraph sound common?) Same place, same school.
Allawi grew up in Adhamiyah, a wealthy, mostly Sunni district of northwestern Baghdad—just across the Tigris from Kadhimiyah, where the Chalabis lived—and attended one of the best schools in Iraq, the Jesuit-run Baghdad College. Among the other students were Ahmad Chalabi and Adel Abdul Mahdi, the current Iraqi Finance Minister. As children, during the early fifties, the Allawis and the Chalabis were members of a cosmopolitan élite—the descendants of well-to-do Iraqis who had been government ministers and members of parliament in the waning years of the British-installed Hashemite monarchy. During summer holidays, Allawi travelled with his family to Lebanon and Europe.
Allawi told me that it was not until a few days after the 1968 coup, when a prominent Baghdad lawyer was murdered by killers linked to Saddam, that he had a change of heart. As Saddam consolidated his authority, Allawi said, his misgivings about him deepened. In 1971, while on a visit to Lebanon, he made his break. Friends in Baghdad called Allawi to tell him that Saddam was conducting a purge of the regime; they warned him not to return to Iraq. Allawi decided to move to London and continue his medical studies.
The most widely shared account of Allawi’s first years in London is that he was still working for the Iraqi Baath Party, and for Saddam, as the head of a surveillance network that monitored the sizable Iraqi émigré and student communities in Europe
Badri also said that Allawi fell out with Saddam after Saddam heard that Allawi had come into contact with M.I.6, the British intelligence agency
For Allawi, the relationship with M.I.6 assured him of continued sanctuary in Britain and provided funds for him to build his own political operation while living in exile.
Beginning in 1975, several of Allawi’s close friends were assassinated by hit men presumed to have been dispatched by Saddam. One was killed in Beirut; another was killed shortly after returning, against Allawi’s advice, to Baghdad. I asked Allawi why he thought that Saddam had not immediately targeted him for death. He explained that for years Saddam had tried to lure him back to the Party, sending envoys to London for that purpose. He had rejected those overtures.
In the late seventies, Allawi kept a low profile. He was employed as a part-time consultant with the United Nations Development Program, which was conducting medical training programs in developing countries.
With intentional vagueness, Allawi said that he became involved in “business” in Yemen and the Persian Gulf region in 1982. Ali Allawi referred to this period as his cousin’s time of “hibernation,” saying that he never really knew what Iyad was up to. In Iraqi political circles, however, the prevailing wisdom is that Iyad Allawi was working closely with M.I.6. An Iraqi political insider who has known Allawi for years told me, “The Brits set him up with oil deals in Yemen to allow him to make money.”
Warren Marik, a former case officer with the C.I.A. who provided support to Iraqi exile groups, told me that Allawi had been an M.I.6 asset until the British passed him on to the Americans, in the early nineties.
After Saddam’s defeat in the Gulf War, in 1991, Allawi adopted a more public role, as the leader of a new organization, the Iraqi National Accord. Since then, Allawi said, “I’ve devoted all my time to Iraq.” The I.N.A.’s goal was to topple Saddam by fomenting a coup led by disenfranchised Baathists and military officers. Meanwhile, his cousin Ahmad Chalabi had created a rival organization, the Iraqi National Congress, or I.N.C.—also funded by the C.I.A., and with a similar agenda. But Chalabi’s strategy was different: a virulent anti-Baathist, he envisaged a popular uprising against Saddam based in northern Iraq, where he had cultivated contacts among Kurdish guerrillas.
Chalabi’s political fortunes declined further, after he was accused of sharing American intelligence secrets with Iran. U.S. troops raided his home in Baghdad and the Pentagon severed ties with him. A few weeks later, Allawi became interim Prime Minister.
My find of the day:
More on Akeel abdul Kareem al Saffar
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/1464412/Saddams-half-brother-behind-Iraq-PM-hit.html
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/04/iraq.rorymccarthy
Obviously some setup MI6 companies to fill him with money:
https://www.duedil.com/director/905983827/akeel-abdul-kareem-al-saffar
His son Kareem al Saffar (same name as his grandfather) is living in Lindon (same address in London SW15 where his father Akeel was registered before)
Kareem has a facebook and a twitter site (worth to have a look at both)
He is befriended on fb with the Allawi family AND with Hussein al Hilli.
Voila, Eric!
Yes, we know that you search for an Aston Martin (my fault .. a BMW X 5 of course). Perhaps his name is Bond. James Bond? Would fit, particularly the “Vauxhalls”.
Bb, stop talking in riddles!!!!!
Well, there we have Hussein Abdulamir al Saffar. A Bahraini terrorist? One of the leaders in the Bahrain Arab Spring? Tortured by Bahrain police? Arrested. Sentenced to life imprisonment for murder and terrorism in 2011.
Abdulamir al Saffar was the name of Iqbal’s father.
On the other hand, Hussein was born in 1986/7. Then Suhyla would have been already 48/49 years old. Probably too late for bearing a younger brother for Iqbal. Or else did Abdulamir have a second, a younger wife? Shia muslims can legally have 4 wives.
http://www.islamtimes.org/vdcb9fb88rhbgwp.4eur.html
http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/5211
Did MI6 sponsor the Bahrain Arab Spring?
Lots of news today regarding the families.
Brilliant Bluebird
29 Jul, 2013 – 3:03 pm. Thanks for explaining so clearly.
2 more Bahraini Shia al Saffars abducted, jailed and one of them sentenced to ling time prison for state terrorism during the Bahrain Arab Spring in 2011. William Hague was very upset. Are they all of them UK assets?
http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/node/1755
http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/21/bahraini-medic-save-lives-danger
from bb’s reference
“After Allawi left, I went inside to talk to Sheikh Suleiman. He and two other men were sitting on black leather sofas in a room decorated with Persian rugs, faux-Hellenistic columns, and oil paintings evoking ancient Mesopotamia. One of the men was the Sheikh’s assistant; the other was Akeel al-Saffar, one of Allawi’s senior aides. The Sheikh wore a gray dishdasha robe with ornate diamond-and-silver cufflinks.”
“Ayad Allawi (Arabic: إياد علاوي. Iyād ʿAllāwī; born 1945) is an Iraqi politician, and was the interim Prime Minister of Iraq prior to Iraq’s 2005 legislative elections. A prominent Iraqi political activist who lived in exile for almost 30 years, the politically secular Shia Muslim became a member of the Iraq Interim Governing Council, which was established by U.S.-led coalition authorities following the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He became Iraq’s first head of government since Saddam Hussein when the council dissolved on June 1, 2004 and named him Prime Minister of the Iraqi Interim Government. His term as Prime Minister ended on April 7, 2005, after the selection of Islamic Dawa Party leader Ibrahim al-Jaafari by the newly elected transitional Iraqi National Assembly.[1]” WIKIPEDIA
‘Al-Maliki’s resignation could return stability to Iraq’ – former Iraqi PM
Get short URL Published time: April 29, 2013 14:58
“Ayad Allawi: I think that all these events – the massacre in Hawijah, deteriorating security and strong political differences – are symptoms of a serious disease. It began with the downfall of the previous regime and that’s when the political process took a wrong turn. What we saw was the marginalization of certain sectarian groups within the country, political sectarianism, and disrespect for the interests of millions of Iraqis, including former servicemen, journalists, Ba’ath Party members. The target was to cleanse the Iraqi political life of Ba’athist influence. So the political system relied on sectarianism, nepotism, and personal loyalty. And at the same time, the state and all its institutions were being dismantled. Because of this misguided political process, we still have an unsettled country where fully-operational institutions and professional organizations are still missing. It is a disease but the country is not getting any medication. And so the destruction of Iraq continues.
RT: Should we blame the US occupation for what is happening in Iraq today?
AA: The US made three fatal mistakes in Iraq. First, dismantling the Iraqi state and its institutions. The second mistake was ridding the political system of all Ba’ath Party elements. The third mistake was to allow the current regime to implement its sectarian policies. After the US withdrew its troops, this sectarianism has spread across all levels of political power.” http://rt.com/op-edge/al-maliki-resignation-stability-iraq-562/
Bleb- thanks for your intervention reTim V ; reminds me of the testing of new boys that used to go on at
British public schools. I’ll do my best to ignore it.
Haven’t been able to watch the MZT route yet, due to poor broadband connection.
Your discovery of the Indymedia item claiming SAH had reluctantly worked on Saddam Hussein’s WMD programme is quite a find; it could explain the gaps in his work record, and supplies a plausible reason for his removal – a bit too plausible. A pity there is no source quoted for this theory, tho’ that would be too much to hope. Of course, it doesn’t explain the killing of SM or of the women.
@Fera – regarding that Indymedia item:
I’m almost certain it must have been noticed and discussed in the “early days” and I just don’t remember/have forgotten or was just not paying enough attention.
Perhaps someone with a better memory can enlighten us?
BTW it refers to a “nuclear program” (ie: could be civil reactors) and not WMD as you say.
iT’S NOTHING PERSONAL Fera
30 Jul, 2013 – 12:11 am – just that the content of your post failed to accord with the facts on so many levels and that your subsequent “correction” merely compounded. Was it your first contribution here? You say you were there at the time, felt closely involved, yet it takes ten months to find the CM site? Then remarkably have a detailed knowledge of previous themes and contribute timing claims that just cannot be accurate and descriptions of the crime scene that are clearly wrong. So perhaps you could explain how this could be?
Then again, without having seen the CM site before you appear to be informed of my view about an intended meeting and ask me the question if I still think it? How would you have gleaned this information if you had not been following the thread?
As I said this isn’t personal – just that none of it makes sense rationally. Oh and of course I still hold to the notion that a an arranged meeting was being held up there. It is the only sensible explanation for multiple elements of the story. However the purpose of it and who else was there is till a mystery. To us at least. Anything you can add from your personal experience of course, if it makes sense, will always be welcome here unless you are averse to the principle of “peer group review”.
Bleb
30 Jul, 2013 – 12:33 am thanks for making that correction which saves me doing so. (Was that an intentional inaccuracy I wondered?)
The suggestion that SAH assisted with the Iraqi nuclear programme is difficult to accept not least because it never really recovered following both Iranian and Israeli air attacks in 1981 when Saad was still not out of university. Is it really likely he went back there after the first gulf war?
“Operation Opera”
“Iraq had established a nuclear program sometime in the 1960s, and in the mid-1970s looked to expand it through the acquisition of a nuclear reactor.[18] After failing to convince the French government to sell them a gas-graphite plutonium-producing reactor and reprocessing plant, and likewise failing to convince the Italian government to sell them a Cirene reactor, the Iraqi government convinced the French government to sell them an Osiris-class research reactor.[19][20] The purchase also included a smaller accompanying Isis-type reactor, the sale of 72 kilograms of 93% enriched uranium and the training of personnel.[21] The total cost has been given as $300 million.[22] In November 1975 the countries signed a nuclear cooperation agreement and in 1976 the sale of the reactor was finalized”
“Aftermath[edit]
Ten Iraqi soldiers and one French civilian were killed in the attack.[11] The civilian killed was engineer Damien Chaussepied, variously described as 24 or 25 years old, who was an employee of Air Liquide and the French governmental agency CEA.[71][72][73] In 1981, Israel agreed to pay restitution to Chaussepied’s family.[73]
Iraq said it would rebuild the facility and France agreed, in principle, to aid in the reconstruction.[74] Because of a mix of factors, including the Iran-Iraq War, international pressure and Iraqi payment problems, negotiations broke down in 1984 and France withdrew from the project.[41][75] The Osirak facility remained in its damaged state until the 1991 Persian Gulf War, when it was completely destroyed by subsequent coalition air strikes by the United States Air Force, one of them being Package Q Strike.[76] During the war, 100 out of 120 members of the Knesset signed a letter of appreciation to Menachem Begin, thanking him for ordering the attack on Osirak.[77]”
WIKIPEDIA
BB that Allawi initiative proves despite public positions held by governments, nothing much changes. Broadly the US has taken over Britain global role and still works covertly to get its desired results in the middle east, the main constituents of which are Israel and oil, to which all other considerations, geo-political, economic and humanitarian, are subservient. Under Obama, that Israel worked hard to prevent having a second term, (never had presidential relations been so cool) the American position is more confusing. There is new emphasis on the peace process and Bibi is forced to play for time. However what the White House and State Department say and CIA and military does, may be very different things.
Tim – “Is it really likely he went back there after the first gulf war?”
I don’t know. See the “PC3” ref below.
But the wiki page for Operation Opera:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera
has some interesting bits, you’ll find full refs in the wiki (I’ve not followed them up or looked at the authors reputations):
1) “PC3” program
“Bob Woodward, in the book State of Denial, writes:
Israeli intelligence were convinced that their strike in 1981 on the Osirak nuclear reactor about 10 miles outside Baghdad had ended Saddam’s program. Instead [it initiated] covert funding for a nuclear program code-named ‘PC3’ involving 5.000 people testing and building ingredients for a nuclear bomb”
2) Israeli “previous” [my bold]
“Anthony Cordesman writes that Israel conducted a series of clandestine operations to halt construction or destroy the reactor.[41] In April 1979, Israeli agents in France allegedly planted a bomb that destroyed the reactor’s first set of core structures while they were awaiting shipment to Iraq.[41] In June 1980, Israeli agents are said to have assassinated Yehia El-Mashad, an Egyptian atomic scientist working on the Iraqi nuclear program.[42][43] It has also been claimed that Israel bombed several of the French and Italian companies it suspected of working on the project, and sent threatening letters to top officials and technicians.[41][43][44] Following the bombing in April 1979, France inserted a clause in its agreement with Iraq saying that French personnel would have to supervise the Osirak reactor on-site for a period of ten years”
SM = nuclear realated technician?
@Tim V
29 Jul, 2013 – 2:52 pm
re ZAH’s marriage. ‘Heretical’? Maybe but only depending on your point of view and attitude towards irrational belief aka religion!
I have a number of friends who are in seemingly very happy mixed Muslim /non-Muslim marriages/relationships. Others however have fared less well, Jemima Khan (nee Goldsmith) and Princess Diana spring to mind!
@bleb
28 Jul, 2013 – 7:25 pm
Nah, ‘Shah-in-exile’ in waiting would probably be over-egging it, as of course there is one already. But possibly being nurtured and groomed by the Brits for some kind of role in post conflict Mesopotamia!
Bluebird, thanks for the explanation regarding muslim names. I must say I was a bit confused, but now, no longer am, thanks to you.
So, Suhaila was Al Allaf – though in many papers they referred to her as Al Saffar which is what confused me.
As I mentioned before, I noted that Lars, in his summary at MZT, apparently found material indicating Suhaila had a PhD in Biology. From a universitiy in London.
I have been kind of thrown by that since I could not recall anyone here on CM finding evidence to that effect, yet it seems important. Such a highly educated mother, will explain both daughters going into dentistry. but for some reason, this little fact keeps bothering me. How come we didn’t come across it anywhere? unfortunately, lars gave no background for that degree, just noted it down as a known fact. may be someone who is still welcome on MZT could ask him?
this does kind of open a new can of worms. If she really got her degree in England, why and when did she move to Sweden and what was her employment history? what do we know aboyut her/ is it possible she never worked following her degree? seems kind of unlikely.
Given the importance of the Al Saffar and Al Allaf families, is it out of the question that Suhaila could possibly be targeted – as Tim V once suggested? no we have no evidence or motive, but we can’t possibly ignore the possibility that Saad was not the main target. Of course, there were all those chicken farms – surely a biologist could come in handy?
Tim V, Bluebird – regarding possible thawing of relations with Iran:
There is no doubt that following the election of Rohani in Iran, realists at the US State Department seemed willing to reconsider the contacts, and several have so indicated.
Such a move would definitely be in tythe US interests – strengthen the border with Afganistan, more security and influence with Iraq, may be even Syria (which looks to remain firmly with Assad in place), and hezbollah. why not? stranger things have happened. For those who see America as an empire, a deal with iran – on good terms – is what a smart empire would do.
Alas, in comes israel, the recalcitrant vassal, which actually has a de facto control over US foreign policy – and its congress. israel just started sending around again its henchmen/women rattling swords, demanding more sanctions (which congress of course will have to oblige), more talk of “military option, even as it continues to burn slow fires under Cameron (who is also in thrall to israel – and its unique british Lobby for any number of reasons). Israel is the one actor in the middle east one cannot expect to behave rationally on some fronts – rationale in the sense of its own self-interest. Why that is so is a long and complicated story, and many reasons were given (I have mine, of course. But that’s perhaps way OT).
therefore, in trying to read the tarrot cards for any new deals with Iran, one must first look to what the Israel consensus is as expressed through its congressional spokespeople in Congress (think Schumer, Feinstein in senate and Wasserman-Schultz and cantor as the house enforcers). Which echoes in the media through certain jewish and semi-jewish papers .(the Forward, Goldberg in the Atlantic, the usual shills in NYT and WP plus all the think tanks talking heads from WINEP, heritage etc). Even haaretz is providing space for the saber rattlers – no doubt reflecting the official government mood. Speaking of harretz that’s usually a good source for gauging the mood among the israeli military echelons -usually the more pragmatic side of their debates. At least for now (that pragmatism is not for ever either, given the demographic changes making their way upwards among the officer corps).
Israel, for its own crazy reasons, cannot let Iran be. If it went all secular tomorrow they still wouldn’t be inclined to live and let live. just the way it is.