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?
Q
I think that this is the blurred shadow of the google car.
Some of you might say that all this talk about ‘Jews in Ukraine’ is bullshit?
Say that again? This is the prime reason why The Israel Lobby (primarily based in the US – because this is where they can exercise power. If Uganda was the place to exercise power on a global scale – Uganda would be the place they assembled) is so interested in Ukraine, and indeed just have engineered the opposition taking over power from the pro-Russian, democratically (in free and fair elections overseen by the international observers from the OSCE) elected Mr. Janukovics.
Martin’s DNA would be on the ignition key so that could be verified by an efficient team…….but there is the problem, ‘efficient’ has a hollow ring about it.
Especially when the idiotic French opened up the scene to journalists only three days later & then decided to close it again when it was well & truly contaminated.
Just refresh your memory here:
http://news.sky.com/story/981976/france-shootings-post-mortems-to-begin
Correction…………… the site was opened on the 7th,not three days later. Unbelievable !
Leaks from the SAS stamped on by MI5/Special Branch.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576530/Met-chiefs-bid-use-secret-courts-seize-whistleblowers-files-foiled-victory-open-justice.html
Marlin
9 Mar, 2014 – 7:52 am your third paragraph gets my point. We were told that another cyclist came on the scene at some point and that he was an OAP. No one as far as I know has followed this up, identified him or substantiated the claim he was an OAP. The fact that no details have been given about him, or an account of what happened obtained from him, is in itself suspicious.
Let me put it another way, if you were the man(?) in charge of an undercover operation in a remote spot in SE France, you would certainly ensure there was back up, and you would probably ensure an innocuous “eyes and ears” was on hand. But given the remote situation and the risky nature of all such, you would almost certainly want someone “fairly handy” even “tooled up”. Any weapon on a cyclist creates problems as it can’t be blatant. The back pack or “bum bag” are the only options.
So in charge of an SAS type individual, would you really be prepared to make him public property. This is counter to all expectation and experience. They are ALWAYS camouflaged/hazed to prevent recognition. So the French announce a hero RAF man so we have to have one. But he can’t be the real one can he, if he’s undercover/SAS type. So WBM takes the role and a storyline whilst “other biker”, who perhaps even had to fire his weapon, disappears into the shadows and is never seen again?
France can’t reveal their duplicity. British pissed off with the French but can’t reveal the truth either as it would uncover a can of worms and even put their agent in the judicial firing line that Franch doesn’t want either?
All pure speculation of course.
Two not three days later as you say Katie
9 Mar, 2014 – 8:29 am. Even more amazing blood stained gravel and stones, glass and at least one embedded cartridge was left there. However you notice by the time the press were let in, virtually all the cartridge markers had been REMOVED. This was essential if Maillauds story of the reversing car and attack at the top end of the car park was to have any chance of success. It also raises the question of PLANTED EVIDENCE, specifically the glass fragments 15 metres away from the car. If the car wasn’t damaged up there, how did the glass get there? That it hadn’t been collected is suspicious enough even were it from an unrelated vehicle and event, but if it had been placed there to support a lie it would be worse.
I’m surprised that nobody apart from BB and myself has commented/replied to the post @ 7 Mar, 2014 – 7:30 pm
After all people claiming to have known SAH don’t turn up every day of the week!
Tim, ref; that broken glass on the other side of the car park..
It’s not a reversing arc, when you look at that lay-by in full, from a height, you can discern a full circle.
I suspect AH came in from the left having come from higher up the hill maybe killing time before a meeting , went to the right of the carpark where Max has him placed on his demo but then around in a full circle when exiting, was stopped & only THEN he reversed in a panic, maybe because something/one was blocking his way .
So, was it when the firing began, hence the glass over there, he started the engine went forward not backwards, but hard left into the circle ….. when reaching the other side & about to enter the road he reversed into the spot we all know.
Take another look at the photo & you will see there is room to do just that.
That would bring the arc tracks into line.
Bleb
9 Mar, 2014 – 2:46 pm
I’m surprised that nobody apart from BB and myself has commented/replied to the post @ 7 Mar, 2014 – 7:30 pmAfter all people claiming to have known SAH don’t turn up every day of the week!
——
I agree with Bleb.
I am particularly thrilled by the timing:
On August 21 2012, clashes broke out between Houthis (= SAH’s people according to the source) and tribes in Ash Shahil District of Hajjah after Houthis allegedly shot two women in the district.
+++
NOTE: Aug 21 2012: 2 women were shot by SAH’s people. Two!!!!
+++
A truce was signed between the two sides on August 30.
+++
NOTE: Isnt that the day when SAH left the UK?
+++
+++
Sept 5th
2 women were killed in france (+SAH)
+++
Sept 6th (truce broken – see below sept 6th)
+++
Revenge? Blood feud?
+++
Clashes reignited on September 6 and Houthis managed to seize control of five schools, a medical center and a police station. Some 30 people were killed in the battles. Did they beat up one 7 years old girl in one of the schools with a gun and shot her in the shoulder as revenge? Why did they take schools?
I was always thinking about why there had never been any reports regarding blood feud after 9/11
I had posted the Houthi clan links before.
Just as a side note: Houthi clan is supported by Iran and by Hezbollah.
Al Sistani, al Hakim and al Khoei support the Fiver Houthis.
And once more: Fivers (Houthis) are said to be the most moderate muslims world wide respecting women rights.
Sorry above for freudian slip:
Should read: 9/5 but not 9/11.
Some interesting links and text regarding the Houthis that all might fit well.
Yemeni government has reportedly contacted with US President Barack Obama, asking him to continue his support in killing Yemeni Shiite Muslims in north of the country.Yemeni state media agency, Saba, reported that President Ali Abdullah Saleh has welcomed Washington’s continued military involvement in the war against Houthi fighters in northern province of Saada.Obama in his message to the Yemeni president said Washington was “committed” to its support of the Yemeni government in the war against Shiite Muslims in the country, the United Press International reported Saturday.”The US will continue to support Yemen …,” Saba quoted the US president as saying.Meanwhile, a Houthi military official said in an interview with Saada news site Friday that there was enough evidence on the participation of US air force in raids against Shiite Muslims in north of the country.He also said: “Being in a state of war since 2004, we are aware of the military capabilities and capacities of Yemeni government and we can distinguish between the Yemeni and Saudi air force and the US fighter jets.”Washington came under fire from international community recently after its fighters killed more than 120 civilians and injured hundreds of others in several air raids in north of Yemen.Yemen launched military operations against Houthi fighters in August. The conflict became complicated when Saudi Arabia got involved in the war, backing the Yemeni government in suppressing Shiite Muslims in the region.However, the Saudi officials deny the involvement.
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Report-Yemen-Houthis-fighting-for-Assad-in-Syria-315005
Q: Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi and those close to him have not made any public or media appearances for a number of months. Is there a reason behind this?This is because Saada is distant from the decision-making center, which is Sana’a, and so our main leaders are trying to stay away from the capital because of the assassination attempts against Ansar Allah
There are centers of power in Yemen which do not want to hand over authority or depart from the political scene, and so they are creating problems and security issues, including bombings and assassinations. Many of these parties have links to Al-Qaeda
http://www.aawsat.net/2013/12/article55326008
Indeed Bleb
9 Mar, 2014 – 2:46 pm. A “fellow biker” too! But is it genuine or just a throw-away to tantalise and never appear again. We need more posts before we can form an opinion eh? The gist however seemed to be to suggest a link to the SSST (?) takeover, no?
Sorry Katie
9 Mar, 2014 – 3:53 pm I couldn’t disagree more. Neither the geometry or timing or distribution of shell casings support your interpretation of events. We’ll just have to agree to disagree I guess.
@Tim @ 8.50pm – I agree, to be decided.
However I think they deserve some sort of halfway friendly response and/or interest.
Tim V, if you have time you may want to check max’s latest timelining on Deadzone. I know it’s a hussle to check on two blogs but neither this or that one are all that active at the moment.
The reason is that I’d like to have a good collection of the scenarios contributed by different people that make a fair attempt to weave together what and when and how of Chevaline. I think that as your post suggests (bringing in the possibility of the 3rd biker being involved and the “WBM on the scene” not being the “WBM who gives interviews”, we are beginning to entertain more out radical notions which involve different people lying, covering up or just being plain confused. It’s easier for us I think to consider the possibility of official involvement by a state, say the French one, than it is for others who perhaps live in or close to France.
Max’s latest suggestion is that ONR1/ONR2/WBM/BMW can be made to “fit” IF the following is included:
(1) ONF1 mistook SAH’s car going up for a X5. So there’s no X5.
(2) Both ONF1 and ONF2’s timeline can be moved to earlier than ONF1 says 9who was specific about 3:20PM encounter of the X5, a short way down from the martinet.
Whether right or wrong, I appreciate Max’s continuing efforts to put the story together. Of course, he is making his own task harder by reluctance to consider the possibility of another car at the lay BY.
The resistance to that idea is seconded by katie (see above explanation for the arc that does not lead to SAH’s final location), all in an effort to put the BMW at the top of the car park. Why insist on this? well, because….we don’t know why.
others (You, I, Q, several others) here are perfectly content to accept the possibility of another car at the lay by, a contention now given some support by ONF1 testimony. It’s not of course, a given fact, but a supposition, but there seems no reason to exclude that possibility and some reasons to include it. Now bolstered by ONF1’s testimony to the BBC.
As you know, I’ve been musing over the “things we are not supposed to question” and per last count, had 8-9 of those. Of course, the “not questioning” is what leads to increasingly complicated scenarios of what took place.
To wit – the double-trip as suggested by Max is creative – and as he says, elegant, but it adds quite a bit of complexity, generating lots of its own set of questions as to the whys and hows. It also necessitates moving the timelines to and fro so as to “make things fit”. For example, he now accepts the Fillion-Robin saw SAH’s car at 2:40PM – time had to be moved to earlier to explain the first trip, followed by back trip to Droussard, then the second trip, arriving “just in time” to be shot at around 3:40PM. The latter is the time given by panorama, which has every appearance of being “moved forward” by 5-10 minutes, no doubt to accommodate the photo time (I think the PTBs must have been looking at your outline, Tim V, that made it clear that it was all but impossible for SAH + family to pile into car, drive up the Combe d’Ire, arrive at the martinet, get out, get shot etc, all in 15-20 minutes max. Solution? move the time of the killings to 3;40PM – whyever not, right? what’s 5-10 minutes between friends anyways?).
Of course, that leads to outright conflict with Bossy’s testimony that he arrived “before 4PM”, made a phone call (implying this was the 3;48PM one), spent 6-7 minutes WITH WBM on the scene, then greeting the pompiers at 4:05Pm). Alas, no way we can reconcile WBM’s arrival at 3:45PM (again as stated by Panorama – quite confidently) with 3;48PM call, no matter who made it. Ergo! this again leads to a “third party” on the scene (which I suggested was ONF1, a possible participating party or a witness to the mayhem).
Personally I think that EM and the Chevaline police should be paying max for his valiant efforts to put a story together around facts and times that keep presenting a moving target, all while excluding the possibility of another car lurking at the martinet (hear that, EM? cough it up now, will you?)
Using my “reverse engineering” tool-kit (or painting restoration tricks, if you will) all I can say is that, collectively, an enormous amount of effort has been expanded by many different parties – on and off-line – to bolster a unified resistance to that second car. Of all the “can’t go there’s”, this one element stands out. Everything else has been touched up, derided, supported, and speculated upon, but another car? that cannot be. Just notice how willing katie is to accept a BMW reversing, then stopping, then adjusting to reverse again – all to avoid the very obvious possibility – in fact, likelihood – that it was another car making those tire tracks, which were made exactly so as to block the BMW’s way out. Much keyboard clicks have been spent to justify SAH making that arc, instead of just going on the road (scooping up Zainab, disorientation, whatever). But I choose to take note not of the suggested scenarios but of the huge effort – by so many – reporters, bloggers, commentators, what not – to avoid seeing the elephant in the parking lot.
I still believe BTW, that bits and pieces of the panorama program were “gifts”. Which were the gifts and which were the throw-aways is, well, the hard part. In any case, we did not get a photo of the elephant now made fully visible, we got the outlines of a trunk, a tail and some floppy ears. Sure looks like the beginning of an original drawing to me.
Ok, so I decided that the way to rank our various pistes is to apply ice skating judging. The old style – on a scale of 10, with a “technical” mark and an “artistic impression”. Technical here means – supported by facts, visible, proven (ie actually executed). I’ll thrown in there even the “grade of execution” this recent little addition to ice skating scores. “Artistic Impression’ will rank the overall elegance of the scenario, timing and general creativity of the scenario.
By this system, your latest suggestion, Tim V, of the “WBM who is not” gets a 8.5 on technique (we have not so many facts to support it) but a 9.5 for creativity.
Max’s double trip/no X5 scenario gets an 8.2 for the technical mark (there are a few holes in it, no proof or suggestion from authorities that this happened, necessity to move times around and to ascribe poor observational skills to ONF1) but he does get a 9.6 for artistic impression (hey, I’m the judge, and this is ice skating so things like costumes and smiles matter!).
Next time I’ll rank the “extraction scenario”, and may be the “Suhaila as prime target”.
PS I know a tragedy happened at Chevaline. But the lightness is only directed at us all (including the hapless EM who, BTW, never made the finals. He fell all over the place in the short program – sorry Eric, better luck next time. or perhaps it’s time to just get a new coach?).
Bleb, 9:26PM – I noted gar’s comment, but alas, not much to say at the moment. he/she needs to come back and give us a few more tid-bits. We have had other posters over time who put up just one or two comments, enough to tantalize, but never returned. For what it’s worth I hope gar will come back and comment some more.
We all take interest in just a few angles on this case. Q for example brings up many interesting links but I just can’t comment on them all or I’ll never see the sun. And BB always has temptingly curious family connections, but the latest, leading to Yemen, I just can’t follow. Too busy with Ukraine at the moment.
PS would you like to become an ice skating judge by any chance? it’s really fun! you get to collude and wear fur coats!
My own excuse is that I’m off on my own little yarns. Now I even brought up ice skating judging!
Marlin
The yemen thing is easy to understand and refers to Gar’s post that SAH and his wife are Shia Fivers, meaning a Zaidyin what is in fact a member of the Houthi.
As a matter of fact there exists the “Allaf valley” in yemen.
He also said that there was a yemen sailor settling in london a hundred years ago who is said to be an ascendant of iqbal.
For the rest i did suggest the most interesting timeline regarding the chevaline killings and the houthi war.
Two women killed on one side on aug 21st. Then immediately war erupts for 1 week. Then truce. The day truce is negotiated, SAH leaves london. Then two women killed on the other side. War erupts the next day once again.
Houthi are said to be moderate shia muslims. They dont refer to religious terror but they are worldwide leaders in ranting the USA, simply becaus obama joint war on the side of saudi arabia and yemen several years ago versus the Houthi.
Completely agree Bleb
9 Mar, 2014 – 9:26 pm.
@Marlin – re: resistance to other vehicle(s) at lay-by
I guess this must be because it would mean admitting to a conspiracy (combination of people for an unlawful or a reprehensible purpose).
I do find the idea of totally excluding the possibility of a conspiracy odd. Its not as if they don’t happen.
Why not a conspiracy with state/criminal/religious/political/some-other motivation?
Marlin
9 Mar, 2014 – 9:38 pm It is by considering all possibilities, we may hit gold.
Responding to your/Max’s points one by one without any particular axe to grind:-
1. It’s a fair point. The 2.20 time might possibly fit but the photo time would have to be pushed back ten or fifteen minutes I would suggest. Remember the 2.20 time was said to be a kilometre up the Combe. That’s still 2 or 3 K from Arnand and we have to factor in family/children/elderly woman/slow journey (probably)
Next if I remember rightly “ONF1” reports a dark skinned driver but no passengers and the description of his driving doesn’t equate to a family driver. Then we would have to accept that an ONF professional, after months of delay and time to think about it, fully in possession of all the facts and details of the car, would make a statement to Panorama, and NOT identify Saad’s car and instead confuse it with a quite distinctly different model.
I have serious doubts about the Panorama story but if they had wanted it to be Saad’s car going up then, it would have been easy, and they didn’t. I can accept intention but I can’t accept mistake.
2. We get the c. 3.15 pm time for ON1 passing the lay-by and “seeing” the “motorcyclist pulling in” is by a process of deduction. He rather strangely doesn’t give a time in the programme. I got it by putting “the facts” together. (Please accept in doing so I do not give them credibility. I am merely using the official story as a baseline to see if it works)
The British police who announced the BMW X5 were more specific on time and location than the French. Brits said it was 2.20 1 k up the Combe. Then we have Brit announced ONF1 guy says he passed it as he left. So this would place ONF1 guy 1 k up the combe at 2.20. Working backwards, all things being equal it puts him at the lay-by at about 3.15.
Both stories come from the Brits. so both could be fabrication. If so we have to ask why the French went along with it?
Of course the ONF2 encounter MUST come after if its the same MC. The rough time has to allow the MC to get back up the hill, then factor in stop and conversation and journey back down, I would say is bound to take us past the crucial time of 3.30. If they escorted the MC down after that the killing has taken place. If before the MC would have to be in the clear. One way or another ON1 and MC are implicated if the story is true.
The rest of your post I agree with completely. Put another way the French don’t want us to think there was another vehicle there; the Brits do. The F don’t want us to know the ONF vehicles/personnel were involved; the Brits do. The French didn’t want us to know TWO onf vehicles were involved; the Brits do; the F didn’t want us to know the ONF saw EM’s chief suspect TWICE; the Brits do. The F wanted us to believe WBM made the 3.48 call; the Brits didn’t. The F want us to believe SM was dragged by SAH; the Brits don’t. If leaking photos at different stages (showing location of SM’s bike; the family photo; an early one of SM; two of dead Mollier from the ground and air; forcing a photo-fit) is the Brit’s doing, they are in the process of undermining the French story line. Same goes with the Bossy info and other issues we have discussed at length.
Bleb
10 Mar, 2014 – 12:04 am agreed. As I have suggested from the beginning the absolute exclusion of conspiracy by EM and co. insults our intelligence and places a big question mark over the genuineness of his investigation, corroborated by a swathe of other indicators. As we have seen with the Lawrence and other recent cases, the truth will eventually out, and when it does its a headache for the power brokers. The public both in France and Britain give the appearance of not caring. Someone somewhere is thinking how it will be managed with minimum damage to confidence in policing, justice and entente cordiale. No doubt someone is also working out who to blame, who the fall guy is to be, and what story line can be retrieved that has a chance of holding water without dropping our ostensible friends and allies in it.
Marlin
9 Mar, 2014 – 9:50 pm I shall have to work on my “double salchow” then.
Tim V – you did it again! you say 2:20 but surely mean 3:20??
Now be good a repaste your comment with the correct time? people could get confused!
Oh, and this – “If they escorted the MC down after that the killing has taken place. If before the MC would have to be in the clear. One way or another ON1 and MC are implicated if the story is true”
perhaps you meant ONF2? that assuming that it was ONF1 that saw the X5 at 3:20 and ONF2 escorted MC down, yes? no?
I liked your last paragraph summary – the things the french want us to believe but the brits don’t.
I think you may be right in your response to Bleb – there may be some “negotiations” going on about how the heck they can get out of it. The brits, as I said once, want a pound of flesh from the French. At the very least the later must offer one ONF as sacrifice plus agree to lose face. In other words – no way can the french get away with “it” without some humiliation. That’s the price the Brits are asking. The only room for negotiation is how much humiliation and who will get the brunt of it.
This is something that will happen in due course, I believe, because someone keeps upping the ante. How the French will weasel out I have no idea. But weasel out s what they are – and have tried to do all along. Something tells me a certain british agency is royally pissed off at losing at least one of their agents (possibly more; after all, we know nothing about iqbal and Suhaila). That plus ruining a perfectly good ploy, whatever that ploy was.
OF course, the French can’t quite fold up yet because there is a third agency applying the screws. between a rock and hard place, eh, Eric?
Well, Tim V, may be they should ask you for help? I bet byou could concoct a good cover story for the right price?
PS Double Salchow will so not do! One of my offspring did that at 8 years of age…you need to go for triples I’m afraid if you want those scores to inch up. Plus remember – one has to put “emotion” into it….
Bleb, 12:04AM – regarding the effort to exclude “conspiracy” (which is, as you say, collusion of more than one party): I think it’s because of that third party to said conspiracy that I keep mentioning – the ones that cannot be known, or else. The one that really f***ked up but insists on its right to walk away scot-free.
I think there are some who may be working on some kind of a credible “industrial espionage” conspiracy. I have no idea what’s taking them so long! We (notably Bluebird, Q, NR and Tim V) gave them at least 5 possibilities over the past year. And now we have gar with SSTL/Airbus – surely one can make some hey with that one alone?
What I want to know is what happened to all the paid talent? can’t even come up with a decent cover-up story – really! as tax payers all (wherever we are) we should mount an international protest…..
Tim V
9 Mar, 2014 – 8:55 pm
So how else do you explain the glass over on the other side then ?
Does this remind anyone of anything?
“The men who used them were of Asian appearance, Malaysia’s home minister said late on Sunday.
Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told state news agency Bernama: “I am still perturbed. Can’t these immigration officials think? Italian and Austrian [passports] but with Asian faces.”
The Malaysian prime minister has said the country will review its security procedures.
The passports were stolen from Luigi Maraldi and Christian Kozel in the last two years, and were listed as stolen on Interpol’s database. The international police agency said the documents had not been checked with its system and that it had long urged all countries to check passports systematically.”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/10/flight-mh370-malaysians-puzzled-airline-mystery-search-widens
Sorry Marlin. Slip of the finger obviously and stupid me for not checking. You know what it’s like after all these weeks and years!!! Hopefully in spotting you also corrected the error in your mind. For the absence of doubt I hereby proclaim to all and sundry (particularly Sundry) that the stated time was 3.20 pm not 2.20 pm as I stupidly typed into the infernal machine. Thanks for pointing it out Marlin. I really do need a permanent proof reader (as does our friend Maillaud methinks with the emphasis on “proof”) Apologies for the light-hearted nature of this one but the sun is out, the birds are singing, and I am filled with the rites of spring!
CORRECTED REPOST WITH WHAT I meant TO SAY!!!!! Apologies everyone. Hope I’ve spotted them all!
“Marlin
9 Mar, 2014 – 9:38 pm It is by considering all possibilities, we may hit gold.
Responding to your/Max’s points one by one without any particular axe to grind:-
1. It’s a fair point. The 3.20 pm time might possibly fit but the photo time would have to be pushed back ten or fifteen minutes I would suggest. Remember the 3.20 pm time was said to be a kilometre up the Combe. That’s still 2 or 3 K from Arnand and we have to factor in family/children/elderly woman/slow journey (probably)
Next if I remember rightly “ONF1″ reports a dark skinned driver but no passengers and the description of his driving doesn’t equate to a family driver. Then we would have to accept that an ONF professional, after months of delay and time to think about it, fully in possession of all the facts and details of the car, would make a statement to Panorama, and NOT identify Saad’s car and instead confuse it with a quite distinctly different model.
I have serious doubts about the Panorama story but if they had wanted it to be Saad’s car going up then, it would have been easy, and they didn’t. I can accept intention but I can’t accept mistake.
2. We get the c. 3.15 pm time for ON1 passing the lay-by and “seeing” the “motorcyclist pulling in” is by a process of deduction. He rather strangely doesn’t give a time in the programme. I got it by putting “the facts” together. (Please accept in doing so I do not give them credibility. I am merely using the official story as a baseline to see if it works)
The British police who announced the BMW X5 were more specific on time and location than the French. Brits said it was 3.20 pm 1 k up the Combe. Then we have Brit announced ONF1 guy says he passed it as he left. So this would place ONF1 guy 1 k up the combe at 3.20 pm. Working backwards, all things being equal it puts him at the lay-by at about 3.15 pm.
Both stories come from the Brits. so both could be fabrication. If so we have to ask why the French went along with it?
Of course the ONF2 encounter MUST come after if its the same MC. The rough time has to allow the MC to get back up the hill, then factor in stop and conversation and journey back down, I would say is bound to take us past the crucial time of 3.30 pm. If they escorted the MC down after that the killing has taken place. If before the MC would have to be in the clear. One way or another ON1 and MC are implicated if the story is true.
The rest of your post I agree with completely. Put another way the French don’t want us to think there was another vehicle there; the Brits do. The F don’t want us to know the ONF vehicles/personnel were involved; the Brits do. The French didn’t want us to know TWO onf vehicles were involved; the Brits do; the F didn’t want us to know the ONF saw EM’s chief suspect TWICE; the Brits do. The F wanted us to believe WBM made the 3.48 call; the Brits didn’t. The F want us to believe SM was dragged by SAH; the Brits don’t. If leaking photos at different stages (showing location of SM’s bike; the family photo; an early one of SM; two of dead Mollier from the ground and air; forcing a photo-fit) is the Brit’s doing, they are in the process of undermining the French story line. Same goes with the Bossy info and other issues we have discussed at length.”