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?
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/cia-mi6-mossad-brotherhood-trick-egypt.html
http://disquietreservations.blogspot.ca/2011/10/5-facts-that-prove-radical-islam-is.html
http://aangirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2005/11/use-of-muslim-brotherhood-by-mi6-and.html
“In June of 1955 MI6 was already approaching the Brotherhood in Syria to agitate against the new government that showed strong left-wing tendencies and a desire to merge with Egypt (2). The Brotherhood became an even more important asset after Nasser announced the Egyptian takeover of the Suez…
In Syria, in 1982, there was a major conflict between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Syrian government at the city of Hamma that resulted in 20,000 casualties. In the aftermath Syria’s President Asad revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood forces were armed with US-made equipment…
Israel, forever inclined to back divisive movements, surfaced as another supporter of Islam and began to fund the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas.” (8)
The most noteworthy success of the Islamic movement during this time was of course the overthrow of the Shah of Iran and the installation of the Ayatollah Khomeini as the Islamic dictator. British Intelligence had used their contacts with Iran’s mullahs and ayatollahs to help overthrow Mossadegh and install the Shah back in 1953, and these contacts were maintained and used again to overthrow the Shah when his regime fell out of favor.”
Tim v.
Thanks for the links between muslim brotherhood and MI6. Evrrything seems to be very logic and understandable now.
Sadd told one of his friends that he made a big mistake two years ago.
2010/2011.
That was about the time when he fell apart with Zaid, too.
What kind of mistake? Uncovering the CIA agents in Lebanon by mobile phone metadata surveillance and/or by being one of the two double agents? Or being one of the group who was uncovered?
The same already happened in 2009 with a group of Mossad agents who were uncovered by Hezbollah double agents.
Read the following quotes:
Former officials said one of the named officers was considered a rising star at the CIA and had been involved in many important operations in Iraq. Whether or not this employee would be able to continue a CIA career outside the U.S. is unknown. Former officials said it is likely Hezbollah has already shared photographs of the case
It was not immediately clear whether the exposed CIA officers in Lebanon have been pulled out of the country. The Associated Press is not publishing the names of the officers because they could refer to operatives who remain undercover.
The disclosure indicates that Hezbollah is sending a sharp message to the CIA to stay out of Lebanon, suggesting that it could have captured the CIA officers at any time since it knew their identities. In 1984, Hezbollah kidnapped the CIA station chief in Beirut. He was tortured and later killed.Al-Manar said the CIA team in Lebanon consisted of 10 officers and all used diplomat cover. The station said their jobs were to oversee intelligence networks in Lebanon.
It was claimed that the undercover operations, codenamed Pizza, were compromised when two Hezbollah double agents pretending to be working for the CIA helped to identify the agency’s informants and the case officers they were meeting at the restaurant.But a former senior US intelligence official told ABC News that CIA officers ignored warnings that the operation in Beirut could be compromised by using the same location for meetings with multiple agents. The CIA station in Beirut was also allegedly warned that Lebanese informants could be identified because they used mobile phones to call only their CIA handlers, and were therefore traceable.
http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=world&url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57342024/hezbollah-names-cia-agents-in-lebanon/&catid=57342024
http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/beirut-pizza-hut-meetings-with-hezbollah-compromise-cia-network/story-e6frg6so-1226202659126
Now Americans are particularly amateurish, and their “CIA” a laugh. What’s the idea of using a codename like “Pizza” ? You have to be filthy, overblown and oversize American to come up with anything like that.
I’m a bit surprised if British Intelligence worked together with the Muslim Brotherhood in this way. Boy if this is true [But we have to have other sources, not just a story with a link from an obscure website thrown in by a single American], it is rotten! No wonder the “West” is so hated, and if they respond by attacking they are kalled “terrorists”.
I hoovered up the last sentence from the American‘s post at 1.42 pm :
-and put it into Google’s search engine, and saw that it was copypasted from an obscure blog called “Redmoonrising.com”, which is not what he linked to.
It’s obviously written by a semi-litterate American, notice the last word “favor”, American misspelling of what in English naturally are called “favour”.
The sentence quoted seems to suggest that British intelligence also was involved in the overthrow of the Shah, which is just a laugh, and show how way out and detached from reality Americans generally are, when it comes to understanding the Middle East.
Hi Bluebird
In your post earlier this afternoon (2 Aug, 2013 – 3:00 pm) you wrote the following:-
“Sadd told one of his friends that he made a big mistake two years ago. 2010/2011. That was about the time when he fell apart with Zaid, too. What kind of mistake?”
Do you have a link referencing this ‘big mistake’? Was it in one of the IM chat logs?
Could this ‘mistake’ be promising to put half of his house (inherited from his mum) into Zaid’s name? Or maybe starting the legal process to do this, as it’s not clear to me that it was actually completed.
Thanks
The GIPper
@Bluebird 31 Jul, 2013 – 11:06 pm: Of course they knew.
@Marlin 1 Aug, 2013 – 4:07 am: The families of those involved in government research, or research for private corporations, may have no idea what their relative actually does. This is due to secrecy agreements employees at higher levels in various projects must sign. So, other than knowing what kind of education and training their relative has, they have little idea about the day-to-day work involved. This applies to spouses of such employees. Some people spend entire careers working on projects that no one in their family knows anything about.
You’re right; time has moved on since Saad was a student, and technology and research quickly become obsolete. Saad was “only” a CAD designer? Aren’t CAD designers integral to the process of new technological innovation? Aren’t they the ones who model the proposed projects to test if they will work in real life? A mechanical engineer who works with CAD designing new components for technological advancements would be just the type of person who would need to sign a secrecy agreement, and certainly when working in the competitive and ultra-secretive field of satellites.
Stating the obvious, but it would make sense that events in the news following the deaths at Chevaline might be part of the reason for the deaths at Chevaline.
Who do you mean then Bleb just checking if it’s me ?
Bleb
2 Aug, 2013 – 12:03 am
“And on this blog the reappearance of a poster from the distant past, apparently with the sole purpose of getting under the skin of another poster.
I’m not meaning you James :-)”
@Pink – Don’t be so daft! 🙂 No not you.
Look a few posts above yours^^^ and yesterday between 16:00 & 17:00.
“It’s obviously written by a semi-litterate American” – now that IS funny. 😉
GIPper
Your question. This was mentioned in some of the many MSM reports. It was quoted here. I cannot remember when but i definitely know that this came from MSM.
Pink…
Bled doesn’t mean me.
I just “call it as I see it”. I guess I saw it.
Bleb, pink, sorensen et all.
Please do not have personal rants here. None of us is perfect. We did make a huge step forward. Please dont destroy our successful path with personal rants. Tim v. is an important contributor since the early days of this blog and he keeps that blog alive. Sorensen is most welcome, at least that is my opinion, as long as he stays on topic.
I dont care about who is who and where they come from. It’s easily visible anyway and the NSA already knows who we are since the early days of that blog. There is no secret on the internet. Tim could be anybody, but unless he isnt extremely smart and deliberately confusing us, he is always posting from the UK. He is sitting far away from the USA. You were wrong sorensen, and that is why tim probably was teasing you with his answer.
Lets stay on topic.
A huge explosion at Homs. Looks remarkably like a nuclear mushroom cloud but we saw similar at West, so maybe not? Significantly totally ignored by BBC 10 o’clock news as far as I could see. (Apologies if I missed it) Mustn’t frighten the horses.
Then on a completely different tack, an old report that I always thought was puzzling, namely that Sylvain Mollier had a current application for British Citizenship. If true what implications does that have? Three years leave and wanting to leave France??? Did he, like Saad, feel vulnerable and under threat? I’ve had a quick look but cant find a ref. to it now. Don’t know if anyone else remembers it?
Blue….
I think you’re a smart “dude” (or girl).
But don’t you think that an “overall” look at things is needed.
You do this. You are interested in facts and blind alleys.
We have both been down them….
But some are just “it’s MI6”. Or “its SIS”.
And that’s when people get “pissed off”. Especially when the “some” can’t actually remember of quote (or even think) facts.
I don’t like “Sorryson”…. a pain in the ass as he is, he does actually “produce” facts (which can be shot down…but it is actually “original thought”). And “some” do not do that. Ever.
[Mod/Jon: removed, abusive]
@Bleb
As you pointed out when you mentioned the rest of CM I a bit lightweight in these matters and I confess to not being very streetwise or whatever the internet equivalent is ,I am glad its not me you had me worried there for a minute 🙂
I have frequently been shocked at some things I read, I could go on but have elected not too as I would be punching out of my league.
@Pink
It does you credit.
I’m amused that BB should think we were “ranting” at each other though.
Blue….
Re the cousin.
I have how the news “didn’t” contact them !
It wasn’t by facebook.
So Skype ? Or other ?
Back on topic
This is the other grandfather of Saad al Hilli (fathers side)
Hajj Sheykh Husayn al Hilli
He was the teacher for islamic jurisprudence for ayatollah al sistani in najaf.
So then, both grandfathers were islamic clerics.
http://imawa.org/aboutp.html
Read the part regarding al sistani (link above).
Not surprisingly Hajj Sheykh Kadhim Abdul Husayn was a leading member in al Khoeis’ and al Sistani’s London group.
Blue
The “secret service” was at the funeral ????
Why ?
It’s getting weird this…
“The SS press officer told me not to make a scene as he had a good working relationship with said pap”.
And hopefully Tim doesn’t start “cut n pasting” links to the third sea lord of the Saudi navy !!!!!
Joining in with Bleb’s call. Personal tiffies are silly and I, for one, don’t like to see personal jabs at anyone. not here and not at MZT.
That being said, we do have the phenomenon of forum disruption to contend with. Why wouldn’t we? every forum on almost any topic out there does. I call it when I see or suspect it, and not until my suspicions run to a fairly high level (no Anders here). I call it, because I think it’s important sometimes to realize that there are individuals who are deliberately trying to get a “rise” out of another poster. For reasons that only they know. When it looks like forum disruption attempt, it usually is.
Mind you, for me, even when I do comment on things to do with blog dynamics (why not, it’s par for the course), it’s absolutely nothing personal. As I noted above, the MO of poster lynda comports with several common tactics used to sway, slide or disrupt forums, often seen when a topic is controversial. That does not mean I view Lynda’s contributions as not valuable or her person as an excellent one or individual comments deserving of snide or ridicule – whether viewed as strong on the merits or not. can only hope I was not found guilty of such (even if marilyn thinks otherwise, or so expressed).. It’s just that yes, I believe there is a pattern to some people’s posts, which are consistent with an agenda that is not transparent to the rest of us.
What I really don’t like to see is when there are obvious aspersions cast by one commenter on another, not for being potential trolls or anything, but for being who they are, making the accusations personal..
In particular, I beg to differ with james here most strongly as I greatly value Tim V’s opinions, which are always analytic and logical and oftentimes thorough, even when speculative. I have seen him change his opinions when facts were presented that pointed elsewhere, just as I have changed mine about a few things. I understand that not everyone cares for an analytic style, which by necessity calls for a certain length (me defending length? now, now…) . Everyone has their own way of laying out paragraphs, some more cryptically than others, some easier to follow, some riddled with riddles. So what? everyone can skip what doesn’t interest them and I assume most people skip most of my posts (sadly…. but no violins). To site one example, IMO< Tim V's analysis of the car tracks in the martinet was masterful and I see not a single reason to disagree with the gist of the rationale given. Whoever made those tracks, it wasn't Saad's BMW – if we can be certain about anything – this would surely be on top of the list. if some still disagree, well, they probably have their reasons, and/or just didn't care to go through the entire reasoning.
In any case, I prefer not to see any further petty deprecating remarks on anyone's part, as these all too often remind me of one of the most common forum disruption techniques (see the link from Bleb).
Also, I really appreciate those who are able to always stay respectful even when sorely tried. Surely not always easy in the face of provocation. for example, I have disagreed with Bluebird on this or that, and agreed on others, but overall, his/her contributions are both interesting and useful and there's always something new to learn. An ability to stay above the fray, keeping to what points need to be made, is most commendable, on which score .I think everyone can agree.
Finally, for those who wonder why we should concern ourselves with trolls and forum slips and slides – why shouldn't we? aren't we discussing a murder most foul? don't some out there know exactly who and why the what was done? and wouldn't some of "them"- or their reps – find it necessary to slip the "seeds" to make sure the truth remains hidden in all the chafe? I mean, what can be more predictable??
“Hello from Wayne.”ALRIGHT BOY”
@James (The one that is still here )
Can you clarify which cousin you are talking about as the paper said he didn’t want to be identified .
James
2 Aug, 2013 – 2:36 am
You have to go back to the start….
“A cousin of Mr Al-Hilli, who was contacted in Baghdad but refused to be identified, said: ‘If you investigate and find out about Saad’s job, you will know who’s behind his killing.’
The cousin, who lives in Istanbul but was on a business trip to Baghdad, added: ‘We have been told by the police not to say anything more.”
What is “written” isn’t important (well it is…but) what is important is that the Daily Mail had this “contact” with in a very short period of time.
It was “diffused” however.
Saad al Hilli family summyry
Sheikh Zaid (Saeed) Saad Shaaban (father of Fahisa)
Founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Lebanon/Hezbollah
Hajj Sheikh Husayn al Hilli (Kadhim’s father).
(Teacher of Ayatollah al Sistani in Najaf)
Fasiha (al) Shaaban (mother)
Hajj Sheikh Kadhim Abdul Husayn (=Kadhim al Hilli) (father)
Political and religious partner of Ayatollah al Khoei and Ayatollah al Sistani in the board of the London Middle East organisation.
A.H. Hilli (Hashim al Hilli = Abdul Husayin al Hilli), brother of Kadhim
UNO ambassador of Iraq to the United nations
Zaid al Hilli, brother (golf club accountant)
Saad al Hilli (seeking for jobs, engineer)
Immediate downfall of a family or else what does not fit in that puzzle?
Rhetoric question:
Could it be that one brother was always a “father child” while the younger brother always was a “mother child” ?
Could it be that “mother child” turned more towards the interest and the care of his mother’s family right after his father’s death?
That would explain something including the problems between Saad and Zaid.
In 2003 “mother childs” mother dies and mother child plans going back to Iraq?
Connection or coincidence?
Different political interests of father’s and mother’s family? Family feud?
Bluebird wrote:
We agrree that this is the most explosive of your finds? It’s the newest anyway, and as such you should repeat again and agin your reasons for stating so complete with links, because — and I’ve said that to you before — many people are naturally dumb , which is positiv). They will not fall for the first and best, particularly not when it is offered on a fringe site such as this. So if you have found out about something new, you would do everyone(including lurking journalist who could then carry it on to the media) a favour by repeatedly stating your reasons for your claim. This continual repeating will also be an exercise for you to constantly refine your arguments, and make them clearer to grasp.
There is however one serious flaw in your quoted statement, which you need to address. And this concerns Hezbollah, which was set up in 1982 with the explicite purpose of throwing Israel out of Lebanon, which they succeeded doing in 2000.
Bluebird, on Fahisa’s father – you say founder of Muslim brotherhood/hezballah:
I think you have to pick one or the other. hezballah is very much a shiite organization as are the muslim scholars in the shabaan family.
the Muslim brotherhood is sunni, so an alliance was not out of the question, but not so likely for religious figures.
I think that generally, the interplay in lebanon between the different players is extremely complicated and i wouldn’t hazard a guess one way or another. But I doubt very much that the Shabaan – and descendants – had much to do with the Muslim brotherhood.
And I do take note of the humble position of both Saad and Zaid as compared to those who came before them. neither seemed to have much interest in or played role in muslim scholarship/religious/political circles, based on all we know. have the two brothers “gone all professional” or just went “native”?
Tim V. Aug 2nd
My comment on the route taken by Alex on MZT was that he seems to have gone up the Combe d’Ire on a torestry track, whereas I went up the straight, well-surfaced road evidentlly intended for the use of tourists, being signed in English as well as French. I’m she, not he, btw.