Not Forgetting the al-Hillis 22278


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?


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

22,278 thoughts on “Not Forgetting the al-Hillis

1 87 88 89 90 91 743
  • bluebird

    Just a logic rhetorical question.

    If you would like to follow anotger car, you would use a car or a motorbike ( or more of them for not being suspicious)

    If you want to follow a cyclist, both a car and a motorbike would look suspicious only after a short while. Therefore you need a good cyclist from your team in order to follow a cyclist. any other possibility for tracking a suspect riding on a bike?

    No answers needed.

  • James

    Ferret.

    I completely agree.
    But these are of course the Co’s that do get registered.
    My account has lots of pilots on his books…as people talk to each other.
    I doubt he has any SAS chaps…or “UN” heli pilots with their own “chopper”.

    (by the way, would an Mi24 be classed as a capital asset ? Wonder what the “write down” is on one of those !)

  • Jon

    @Ehud Brog/Kenneth – please stick to one handle here. If you intend to switch permanently, make it clear.

    @Ricki: crumbs, don’t become a journalist or a spy! The post in question has been unapproved, but here you cannot expect a mod will turn up every day. In general, once it is published, it is published.

  • Katie

    Bluebird, don’t get side tracked, you are the closest to the truth,others are on a wild goose chase..

    I think we have two separate issues, one where you are leading to , re;info, which I mentioned pages back & the other is Cezus wanting to flush out the mole they knew they had within their company, somehow the two issues have been rolled in together ending with these murders.

  • dave brooker

    “It means there’s not a business there, or a residential property for that matter.

    Oh right, so 55 Princes Gate does not, in fact, exist?”

    It exists alright, you can see the sizes of it on the VOA website.

    It’s just the wrong postcode, but then it’s only some firm of accountants, so I don’t see why everyone is so excited by it.

    “All it means is that there are two postcodes for the same building, as we have already established”

    When does 1 address *ever* end up with 2 post codes?

  • nobody

    @ferret:

    when I said

    “The Sylvain Mollier meeting is the key to this. If you want to commit a robbery, fraud etc. you don’t need a rocket scientist, just a well placed insider.”

    I meant that possibly AH and SM were meeting to discuss a possible “export” (via Lipmann or somebody) which goes astray and ends up in the Gulf, or a direct heist – though that’s unlikely. Their deaths may have been the result of their meeting being interrupted. The insider knew the layout of Crezus, or this, or that…

    “But the “insider” might have been batting for …. which side?”

    On the matter of GW. His employers are not a PR company, concerned with “messages”. The “message” broadcast loud and clear is that they should refrain from telling the world that they do “intelligence” LOL. They made a pig’s ear of it.

  • dopey

    @ bluebird
    Princes gate is the name of that acre where hundreds of houses and several streets have been built after the exhibition in the 19th century.
    ……………..

    An acre isn’t that big. About the size of a football pitch.

  • James

    Dave…

    They may do. As I just looked again…and found another one.
    An accountancy firm with this many security companies !
    That can not be a coincidence.

    And I don’t want to look anymore. This one has links and looks scary.

  • dopey

    I’m still thinking about that Claygate house being worth £800,000 and Saad going to Iraq to do an £800,000 deal.

    Consider that, plus the fact that Saad recently said he was scared he would lose the house, and had also changed the locks etc….AND then the million euros Swiss account.

    Could it be that the money for that house wasn’t originally the fathers, but rather was someone elses, and someone who wanted their money buried in something. Eventually they want their money returned, and at its current full market value. Things may have been fine for years…until the father died and the original “investor” decided they wanted the £800,000 value of the house back….or something like that.

    That might not be enough to have someone wipe out a family, but perhaps the £800,000 in the house was just the tip of the iceberg where recovering money in the hands of that family was concerned.

  • bluebird

    Dopey,

    Although that post is way off topic, but since you mentioned it, here’s my answer:

    Princes Gate is the acre (triangle) between Kensington road, Exhibition road and Brompton road. Dopey, you probably meant Princess Gardens as the “football field”.

    I measured approximately on google Eart and it is approx. 0,35 km2
    That’s quite some acre. There fit in easily 6 or 7 football fields into this acre.

    http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=45941

    http://www.british-history.ac.uk/image.aspx?compid=45941&filename=fig87.gif&pubid=25

    Kenneth Sorensen:

    That exhibition was indeed the Crystal Palace exhibition in 1851 located in Hyde Park. The exhibition road in front of Hyde Park was built and opened for exactly that purpose. The empty acre in front of exhibition road (opposite of Hyde Park) was called Princes Gate and after that exhibition it was given to investors and architects to create a new part of the city of London. Beginning in 1852 to approx. 1865 that part of the city was built. Therefore that whole acre is still called Princes Gate, although there are different streets such as Exhibition road, Brompton road and Kensington road. Brits are traditional folks and therefore they kept “Princes Gate” as their home address for that part of the city of London although the address could be as well 55 Exhibition road or 26 Kensington road. It’s exactly the same house as it is 55 Princes Gate or 26 Princes Gate. Hope that my answer explains that off topic issue completely.

  • Q

    The symbolism of things starts to get a little cloying at times:

    “In Abrahamic religions, Gabriel (Hebrew: גַּבְרִיאֵל, Modern Gavri’el Tiberian Gaḇrîʼēl, God is my strength; Arabic: جبريل, Jibrīl or جبرائيل Jibrāʾīl) is an archangel who typically serves as a messenger to humans from God.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions

  • James

    @CD

    No way am I writing on here. You’ll have to dig around and use LinkedIn.
    But I would be wary of then posting it on here.
    Whilst this is just a board, there is a real world outside.
    And very real people.

  • bluebird

    James,

    if we are afraid of anything than we shouldn’t post nor should we write here. It is crystal clear that all of us could be identified within an hour. I don’t care. I mean, all the information I post is available on the internet. Those aren’t my websites. I’m just researching and collecting information that is already there and you are doing the same. Some people might make conclusions on their own about what we have found, but that’s their private issue. Thex must be aware of libel accusations. However, I am not afraid of any guys on linkedIn since they are there deliberately and they aren’t that dumb that they wouldn’t understand that the information is worldwide available.

    Your behaviour in that regards is psychologically as if you would like to tell us “I have found something that is so good and so important that I can’t tell it”. That’s quite a good tactic because people are getting more curious then. However, trust me, that your life isn’t in danger when you tell us a link or at least a ZIP code where to search for that. They won’t kill you because if you won’t do it then somebody else might find and do it. After all, we aren’t talking about private investigation nor do we talk about spies, we are talking about bits and pieces that are publicly available on the internet. It’s not our duty to remove thos epieces. It would be their own job to remove it. But then, I’ve still got the wayback machine ….

    I might be good and quick in searching the internet since I have some tools others don’t have. However, what I find anybody else could find as well. If one wants to kill me for finding pieces of evidence on the internet then they would have to kill the whole word that has eventually got access to the internet.

    Therefore James, let us at least know the address. Is it 55 Princes Gate? Yes or No?

  • James

    What I can speculate at is that No.55 is the go to accountant if you’re in this line of work, bearing in mind you maybe away alot, so PAYE isn’t the best way to get paid…and you may not need or wantt to work all the time.

    Knowing that, who then was paying ? And for what ?
    I would hazzard a guess and say that you know who, wasn’t there by accident….and that he was most likely working for the Cowboys rather than the Indians.

    Which then complicates things as, was he “with” Mollier ? Or was he “with” Al Hilli ? If he was on a bike, then it’s likely he was with Mollier…but then again, was he on a bike ?

    Clearly things have got “a tad” out of hand. And that there has been a “cover up”.

    Clearly they could not “cover up” Al Hilli et al, someone might notice when they bury him and he’s not at home.

    If you know who, wasa with Mollier, then why ? Why would Mollier require this level of protection ?

    If he was with Al Hilli, then why ? And why didn’t he get caught up in the firefight ?

    So if it wasn’t the Cowboys doing the shooting, then would are the Indians ? And were are the Indians ? And here I think Ferret maybe right. They “were” at the bottom of Lake Annecy.

1 87 88 89 90 91 743

Comments are closed.