Wednesday 5 June 2024

 The first published article I wrote on the Chevaline Massacre in 2012.













The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012 



Quote of the Week 


“After the idiot French cops left that little 4 year old girl, Zeena, hiding in the car for 8 hours, it is clear they are too dull to have 

a hope in hell of solving this thing, just as they were too dull to solve Lady Di’s murder.” — The Gutter Grunt 


The LogoPhere Weekly 



(or whenever) 


Takin’ the “BS” outa’ the BlogoSphere . . . Daily, Weekly, Monthly, or Whenever . 



Vol. I, Wk. 53 October 5, 2012 ()()()()(). 

Vancouver, B.C. 10 ¢, cheap 


The Unanswered Questions Surrounding 

the Al Hilli Murders – by Tim Veater 



Oct05.2012 


T

T

he mystery surrounding the murder of four adults and the 

near-fatal shooting of a little girl in a remote French forest 

lay-by, raise many, as yet, unanswered questions. 


Not only as to the obvious ones of who carried it out and why, but 

also relating to the official governmental response, apparent 

conflicting reports by those concerned and a failure on the part of 

the press to adequately challenge and independently investigate. 

Already the story has slipped from front page, via inside page, to 

nowhere at all, which no doubt will please some. The Annecy 

prosecutor has even suggested it will not be solved for a decade! 

Eric Maillaud, admitted that French police are nowhere near 

finding the killers, have no clear motive and no suspect.” Asked 

when the crime might be solved, he responded: “We might have the 

answers in two, three or ten years – it’s a painstaking procedure.” 

This would appear to be a clear case of an official attempt to damp 

down speculation and expectation. 


If, as in the view of some, this was a very professional operation, it 

raises far wider implications than the already serious murder of four 

adults. If the public cannot be confident in state revelation and 

transparency in such cases, it can only rely on an independent and 

investigative press. So far the press has failed miserably; prepared 

only to act as a conduit of official briefings; failing to question, 

challenge or even point out the inconsistencies and get 

explanations for them. It is something that is attempted below. 


1. 

The French authorities suggested initially, it was 

coincidental, impromptu, chance event – a robbery perhaps 

that had gone wrong. I don’t believe any police or 

government official could have genuinely held this view in 

light of the circumstances, namely the “professional” head 

shots; all killed; nothing stolen; the effective, unseen 

get-away. Then further doubt was added as to whether the 

cyclist or the Al Hilli’s were the intended target. However in 

both scenarios it was suggested the second party was killed for 

“being in the wrong place at the wrong time” thus skilfully 

avoiding the possibility that both might have been, as this 

would have wider implications of conspiracy. 


2. 

As corollary to this, the way the obvious suggestion of 

criminal or state backed assassination was avoided. John 

O’Connor, former head of Scotland Yard’s Flying Squad, told 

The Sunday Times “These murders were carried out by killers 

with the precision and planning that comes with military 

training, which normally points to a political assassination”. 

The fact that this possibility has been obdurately avoided 

puzzling and worrying as it suggests cover-up. 

3. 

The time it took for the French police to discover four year 

Zeena hidden and catatonic in the car – i.e. more than eight 

hours. Perhaps the failure could initially be explained in 

terms of not interfering with the crime scene, but eight hours 

to make enquiries to discover there were two daughters on 

the trip and one was still missing? Further what appears as a 

rather amateurish approach to the crime scene with no 

evidence of a finger tip search, of opening up to the press 

before closing it off again for further investigation when it had 

been contaminated. Aerial photographs show the boot door 

open despite the doors reportedly being locked. In one aerial 

photograph, tyre skid marks can be seen far to the right of the 

BMW. A reporter on the scene stated that broken glass was 

Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater 


The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012 



“fifteen” yards distant from the car, presumably because this 

marks where the first shots were fired before the car reversed 

into the bank? These facts have never been officially 

referred to or properly discussed in the press. Why? A 

reporter said that a motor bike track had been left in an 

adjoining mountain track which presumably could have been 

an alternative escape route? Given the on-going nature of 

the enquiries, why was permission given to the family to bury 


M. Mollier, rather than retain his body under refrigerated 

conditions, in case it was needed for further inspection? 

4. 

The flatly inaccurate and misleading information put out 

initially by the French authorities that the emergency call 

informing them of the incident was made by the British 

cyclist, later identified as Brett Martin. In fact Mr. Martin 

said he could get no signal on his mobile phone and that he 

had to leave the scene and injured Zainab, to get help. The 

call was eventually made by a French national, Phillipe 

Didierjean. There is no way a Frenchman, speaking in 

French from his own mobile phone could have been 

confused with Englishman Mr. Martin, who clearly is not 

fluent in French. This therefore must have been intentional 

misinformation, perhaps to protect M. Didierjean who was 

not even acknowledged for several days. Mr. Martin stated 

that Mr. Mollier overtook him on his bike, yet was dead by 

the time he reached the scene. Mr. Martin and Mr. Mollier 

were apparently known to each other, being members of the 

same French cycling club, yet there is no suggestion of 

recognition in his statements, which to say the least, is 

surprising. 

5. 

It would appear from the reports, that the initial telephone 

call to police was at 3.48 pm. Yet M. Didierjean says he met 

Mr. Martin leaving the scene at about 4.10. pm. Given his 

description of events, walking back to the scene with him 

and checking it out, particularly Zainab who did not 

respond, then walking back down the hill until he got 

reception on his phone. This must have added at least 

another fifteen minutes – say 4.25 pm – before he could 

phone. How can this discrepancy be explained? Then what 

of his two female companions and car? Did they drive up or 

turn around and go back? Were they witnesses to the scene 

or not? 

6. 

Danielle Polittier(?) a local resident of Chevaline, more than 

three kilometres distant, told the BBC that she heard 30 

seconds of shooting. If her testimony is reliable, is it possible 

Mr. Martin, unless he has a hearing impediment, could not 

have heard it, being only moments away. Why does he say 

he heard nothing? M. Didierjean not hearing the sound of 

gunfire might be explained by virtue of the fact that he was 

in a car with companions but what is Mr. Martin’s 

explanation? 

7. 

The conflicting information regarding number and types of 

firearms, the number of shots to the victims and the number 

of assailants. It was first reported that all the bullets came 

from the same semi- automatic pistol, changed to two, 

suggesting at least two killers, then back to one. There has 

been no convincing explanation how so many bullets were 

fired. A Czech made “Skorpion” was suggested. This is a very 

old type of gun rather than more modern alternatives, of 

which there are many. 


Later, the Telegraph reported that it had learned "from 

sources close to the investigation", that the four were shot 

with a Luger P08, a highly-distinctive weapon, which was 

standard issue to the Swiss Army. (It appears that this was a 

9mm version – the 7.65 was in fact the PO4) But Browning , 

Glock. Mauser, Luger, Kel-Tec P-32, Beretta, Colt, 

Springfield Armory, Mauser, Schnellfeuer, Borchardt, 

Heckler & Koch, Kel-Tec all make models that would fit the 

bill. The iconic “James Bond”Walther PPK was adopted by 

MI5, MI6, Deutsch BND, French SDECE, Israel's Mossad and 

a host of other secret operative units, and still used to this 

day. The Beretta Model 70 and 71 was a favorite of the Israeli 

Mossad and sky marshals, replaced by a 9mm Beretta in the 

1970's apparently. 


“Fifteen casings” were later changed to “twenty-five”. 

Apparently ten of the used cartridges were found under the 

car which accounts for the number increasing from 15 to 25 

and a number were found inside the car, but the implications 

have not been discussed. 


Why the conflicting weapon evidence? Why was the 

impression given that the weapon was probably old and 

obsolete and the link with “Serb Paramilitaries”? It was stated 

that three victims were shot in the head, later changed to all. 

The French cyclist M. Mollier was said to be shot seven times, 

including two head shots. This later changed to five. 

Originally some were said to have been shot twice. A little 

later the prosecutor stated all the adults had been shot 

“several times”. 


This is clearly confusing. Why was misleading information 

put out until they were quite sure of the facts? No further 

information regarding trajectory or injuries, which of course 

will afford further clues as to what happened, has been issued. 

Perhaps the French authorities should inform us definitively, 

how many times the victims were shot and where; how many 

guns of what possible types, were used; and explain why so 

many different accounts have been made? 


8. 

Much was made by Mr. Martin of the “green four wheel drive 

and motor bike” but this raises more questions than it 

answers. First, if Mr Mollier was shot only because he 

witnessed events, why was Mr. Martin, another potential 

witness, spared a similar fate? He must have arrived almost 

immediately after the last shot was fired, as little Zainab was 

still stumbling and the car wheels were still spinning. Unless 

the assassin(s) escaped through the woods and used an 

alternative route back, they must have passed him. Second, 

precisely where and when did he see them? Statements vary 

and include both overtaking him on the way up and passing 

on the way down. Given the isolated nature of the location 

and the narrowness of the road, and his extensive training as 

a fighter pilot, he surely could not be uncertain or vague 

Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater 


The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012 



about such a thing? However a vehicle coming down the four 

kilometre road is flatly denied by M. Didierjean who was 

driving up behind. He could not have been mistaken as he 

would have needed to pull over. How can this conflicting 

witness evidence be reconciled? 


9. 

A similar conflict of testimony exists over the state of Zainab 

and position of the bodies. Mr. Martin says she was covered 

in blood, Mr. Didierjean states quite the opposite that no 

blood or injuries were immediately obvious. Mr. Martin says 

he moved her body away from the front of the car in case it 

lurched forward, placing her in the recovery position. M. 

Didierjean says when he arrived, Zainab was lying in front of 

the car, by which time she was quite unconscious and did not 

respond. 

10. 

No one has quite explained why Zainab was outside the car 

when the attack took place, whilst the car doors were locked, 

or why the front passenger seat was vacant? Nor has an 

explanation been propounded why in such an expert 

operation, the life of Zainab was spared. It surely cannot be 

explained by virtue of running out of bullets as suggested? 

The precise location and injuries of the French cyclist M. 

Mollier are obviously critical. M. Didierjean reported that he 

showed no injuries commensurate with falling off his bike. If 

correct this would indicate he was shot whilst walking 

presumably towards the car. Was the front seat vacated for 

this purpose? Why have the papers not posed this question? 

11. 

Similarly amazingly little background to any of the known 

participants has been published. Some sources state Mr. 

Martin is the sole proprietor of a company with liabilities 

three times its roughly £200,000 assets. Is this in fact correct 

and what did this entail since he retired from his RAF post, 

apparently involved in understanding aircraft armament 

systems. Similarly, precisely what did M. Mollier’s work 

entail working for the French nuclear technology 

conglomerate, Areva? Mr. Al Hilli was apparently involved 

in aircraft design and satellite technology. We do not know 

what M. Didierjean does for a living but even so is it wholly 

co-incidental that two victims and primary witness, had 

connections with either aeronautics or nuclear technology? 

It appears Mr. Martin left for Britain immediately after the 

incident and the French authorities raised no objection to 

this despite him being the principal witness. How did he get 

back and was he given Government assistance to do so? 

12. 

A local Bricklayer-stonemason Laurent Fillion-Robin, 38, 

witnessed Al Hilli’s red BMW pass, up Route de la Combe 

d’Ire towards the car park between 2:30-3:00 PM. He also 

says they were not being followed. We are told the crime is 

reported at 3.48 pm despite the fact that M. Didierjean said 

he did not even arrive until 4.10 and then had to return 

down the hill to get reception on his phone. The police 

reported they arrived about 4 pm, i.e. before M. Didierjean. 

How is this possible? So who did phone the police or are all 

the times given unreliable? Why have the papers not 

pursued the time line to clarify it? 

13. 

Sylvie Lecouer, 49, coming back from grocery shopping at 4 

pm or slightly after, was nearly run off the road by a speeding 

Peugot 306. She described him as a “British” man (we don’t 

quite know why) with black crew-cut hair and black polo 

neck shirt driving in a panic. This car as far as we know has 

not been traced or the driver come forward to be eliminated 

from the investigation, which must raise suspicions. However 

if he is a suspect, the question remains as to his involvement. 

Could he have been a killer, an arranged contact or just a 

terrified witness trying to get away? If he was part of a 

conspiracy to kill, it would mean at least three persons were 

involved, that is if Mr. Martin’s story about the motor bike 

and green x4 wheel drive, are to be believed. 

14. 

A question also remains as to why Mr. Al Hilli went to that 

remote location and took his family, yet it would appear, 

giving no appearance of picnicking or walking. He was there 

for about an hour before disaster struck. What could have 

been the purpose other than for a rendez-vous? If so with 

whom? With M. Mollier, Mr. Martin, his killers or someone 

else? 

15. 

There have been published maps of the scene but these have 

been generally very poor and no attempt has been made to 

clearly define the alternative routes available and their 

respective conditions and destinations, or how these relate to 

the witness statements. They assume that only the metalled 

road was used but of course this might not be the case. 

16. 

If neither car nor possessions were stolen we must assume 

motive lies elsewhere. None of the three lines of enquiry 

mentioned by the investigating officer include potential state 

involvement. Indeed the official lines, of family feud over 

disputed inheritance, or violent nephew have the appearance 

of detracting from the possibility. However the statement 

that the origins lie in the United Kingdom whilst deflecting 

attention from France, also, perhaps accidentally, confirm 

they know this to be a planned event, not a chance one as 

was originally suggested. If planned it must have been 

meticulously planned, for how else would the car have been 

located in such a remote spot other than arrangement or 

surveillance? 

17. 

Very little journalistic attention has been directed towards 

the companies for which the victims and witnesses worked or 

were associated. Why? They have remained opaque and 

low-profile. Both Mr. Martin and Mr. Al Hilli were involved 

in aircraft design, with either or both of the British and 

European aircraft industries. Mr. Martin of course was an 

ex-RAF pilot and was then involved in weapons systems and 

"consultancy". His company Silver Fern (Sussex) Ltd., 55 

Prices Gate, Exhibition Road, London SW72PN, founded in 

2006, is classified at Companies House as, "Other 

professional, scientific and technical activities not elsewhere 

classified". Income is limited to about £21,000 pounds, despite 

listed liabilities of over £600,000. 

18. 

Mr. Al Hilli worked for a company (Surrey Satellites 

Technology Limited (SSTL) near Guildford) developing 

Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater 


satellite systems. He was part of a team involved in an 

undisclosed project linked to European Aeronautic Defence 

and Space. He also had his own company - "Shtech", an 

aeronautical business, which he ran with his wife Iqbal and 

which had sub-contracted with SSTL. It registered £8,330 

profit in 2011. In the 1980's he had been employed at the 

internationally-renowned Rutherford Appleton Research 

Centre in Didcot, Oxon, where a colleague reported he 

worked on a giant particle accelerator, which can make 

radioactive material. 


19. 

Mr. Mollier worked for CEZUS located in Ugine, France. 

This centre is dedicated to R&D on Zirconium alloys, 

focusing on process and metallurgy. (A question remains 

why the Daily Mail referred inaccurately to “a company 

producing stainless steel products” instead of Areva’s Cezus 

R&D zirconium products for the nuclear industry?) It is a 

cornerstone of innovation and is known worldwide. It is part 

of Areva, a nuclear multinational, which is also involved 

with uranium enrichment and high-tech metallurgy in the 

nuclear industry. It also has ties with Eurodif. During the 

reign of the Shah, Iran acquired a 10% stake in Eurodif. In 

2011 the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) 

awarded six contracts, including to Areva, relating to the 

supply of natural uranium concentrates, conversion and 

enrichment services, worth some $3 billion for the Barakah 

nuclear power plant planned to start generating in 2017. 

What are the chances of so many concurrencies in one 

iconic crime scene, at a location that recalls Britain's own 

nuclear programme called “Chevaline”? 

20. 

It was reported that within hours a party of "military" types 

had arrived from the British Embassy. Is this highly unusual 

response, if in fact true, and why has the press not asked for 

confirmation? Did they assist the removal of Mr. Martin 

back to Britain? 

The French and British authorities must be in possession of a 

wealth of information from both covert and investigative sources 

that they are not revealing. We must assume they are in full 

possession of all of Mr Al Hilli's telephone and computer 

communications, via GCHQ. As someone who was directly 

monitored in 2003 (indeed according to a neighbours account, 

physically followed) and involved with the defence industries and 

Iraq, can hardly have been expected to have been dropped from 

surveillance completely. Police are in possession of his mobile 

phones and computers which must have afforded detailed 

information on his contacts immediately prior to his murder. And 

how about Mr Mollier's and Mr Martin's phones? What, if 

anything, do they reveal? Surely they cannot have been 

overlooked? Not only so but they must have details via the 

telephone companies, of all calls and locations of mobile phones in 

the vicinity of Chevaline on the day in question, including 

chillingly the killers, unless they were so professional as not to carry 

them. How can Mr. Maillaud say there are “no leads”, unless to 

intentionally misinform? 


That this was a professionally executed operation, cannot be 

doubted. The use and accuracy of semi-automatic weapons and the 


The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012 



way the killers “have disappeared off the map”, cannot be 

co-incidental. Mr. Al Hilli maintained contacts with Iraq and was 

a practising Shiite. He was vocal in his condemnation of Israel and 

the United States on the internet. He evidenced raised anxiety 

over his home and camping location. He went on his European trip 

precisely when his children should have been returning to school, 

all of which points to a purpose beyond purely recreation. Two 

head shots is militaristic and deadly certain. If a state is implicated, 

the question is which state would wish these individuals dead and 

why? Oh and finally, why is this question NOT being posed by 

Western Governments, specifically in Britain and France, or 

media? 


Governments involved in assassination, and there have been recent 

high-profile cases, rely on the fact that the public and media will 

gradually lose interest and that other world and local events will 

eventually bury the story. It is to be hoped that insofar as we still 

retain independent institutions and press, this particularly brutal 

story will not receive the same fate, for in the end, a truthful 

examination and investigation of crime, however caused and 

wherever it may lead, is the only guarantee of our own security and 

freedom; the only thing that distinguishes our democratic political 

system and a despotic, totalitarian one. 


Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater 


Tim Veater

27 Jan, 2015 - 1:15 pm

@NotForgettingFrenchBashing
27 Jan, 2015 – 12:06 pm
“Weave al the tallent they’re is ear, im shure the Chevaline case (slaughter of the horses) Will bee solved an he timesoon.”

Had we had access to all the evidence and resources of (at least) two European States I think the question would be beyond doubt. In admitting “this was the perfect crime” EM is also holding up his country and justice system to ridicule, yet the fact there has been no criticism of him, let alone suggestion he be replaced PROVES he has backing to the top of the system. It means he is doing precisely what his political masters expect of him. If he wasn’t you can be sure you wouldn’t see him for dust apros pos Petraeus in the States or now the whole intelligence top brass in Argentina (apparently).

We have now had, in the space of a couple of years (at least) two incidents that shout black arts and clandestine activity involving elements of national security and foreign policy objectives. Chevaline and now Charlie Hebdo have many points in common. Indeed one could almost say they are two sides of the same coin. Both present cases of savagery that mark them out and guaranteed to get wide coverage and universal “shock/horror” response. They both involve issues surrounding relationships to Muslims and Jews and their respective home states. But importantly they both show evidence of manipulation and falsehood for ulterior motives. However there are also contrasts that signify different objectives.

In the former the alleged rationale and gunmen are advertised from the very beginning. This besides an act of terrorism is clearly an attack by Muslims targeting very specifically Jews and “Free Speech”. Of course how the security services were able so quickly to identify the individuals responsible, yet at the same time claiming ignorance of their activities, is deeply suspicious and hardly credible. It turns apparently on the laughable suggestion of one of them helpfully leaving his identity card behind in the second escape car.

Then we have the Boston style mobilisation and “lock-down” leading to a dramatic car chase (pure Hollywood) and “successful” but inexplicable “shoot to kill” policy, announced as the intention to “neutralise” the suspects prior to knowing the precise circumstances requiring it.

Contrast this to Chevaline where the almost exact opposite in method and outcome is apparent. In this case despite being on the scene almost immediately there is no identifiable escape car, no abandoned car ever, no traced car ever, no chase and of course no confrontation with the suspected gunmen. Rather than advertising suspects and victims secrecy surrounds both. There is little evidence of “mobilisation” or “lock-down”, indeed there is an almost casual “everything as normal” approach to local security, almost as if (!) the authorities know, no further danger is present.

In the former case everything is out there, the criminals are swiftly and precipitously dealt with, with little or no need for forensics or evidence. In the latter even after over two years, silence, secrecy and despite all the wonders of modern criminology, nothing of significance to report, with either confused or bungled forensics throughout.

There is however one common and compelling factor to both incidents and that is both undoubtedly reveal what can only be described as intentional false information being issued by the State. This is crucial to understanding the underlying reason for both events, even if it unable to identify specific persons or organisations behind them. As soon as State organs lie or misinform you can be sure the situation is not as straightforward as they wish you to believe – in the former case that this was offended Muslims seeking revenge on western free expression, or in the latter a criminal act lacking purpose that just happened to accidentally involve a passing local cyclist in the cross fire.

It was statement regarding the initial call that alerted me to what could not be made to fit the timeline, and which has never been subsequently explained, despite unlimited opportunity to do so, that alerted me to official mischief. This was compounded by many more as we have discussed at length. The case for misinformation and cover-up is in my book, proved beyond doubt. Nor despite two anniversary “press conferences” has the opportunity for clear and precise description been seized.

Now in the CH case there is also evidence of official malfeasance, yet the reaction by european and world leaders proves this cannot be an isolated event, but carried out with the knowledge and approval of the rest. “Rest” not including rather obviously the BRIC or Muslim countries which rather says a lot. Clearly this cannot be viewed as a little local affair, nor I suggest Chevaline either, involving of necessity the same state organs.

There are many suspicious aspects of the Hebdo attack that mirror others such a Sydney and Boston (the para military response, the television coverage, the orchestrated public response including available printed slogans in their thousands, the immediate availability of video that went viral, domestic and foreign policy decisions in the legislature on the back of it etc) but facts that clinch one way or another this was a state orchestrated event relates to inconsistencies that can be proved. As with Chevaline, it is photographic and video evidence that proves the lie.



So in the case of Hebdo we have in particular three sets of photographic or video evidence that were immediately circulated on the internet suggesting either amazing preparedness or luck. More importantly all of them show either manipulation of falsehood that cannot be reconciled with more or different sources.

It is now clear that the video from the roof of the Allee Verte building has been edited to remove a posse of uniformed personnel advancing down it. It also has raised other issues relating to others on the roof wearing bullet proof vests etc.

The second video alleging to depict the Muslim policeman as previously enumerated cannot be taken seriously nor really the smiling claimed girlfriend at the subsequent press conference.

The third photo shoot of the alleged abandoned car cannot be reconciled with the subsequent press photos of the police all over it prior to removal. As has been logically and unemotionally proved here using the photographs and Google Earth street view …. the locations though in the same street are literally YARDS apart.

As soon as lies of this nature and importance are proved, nothing in the official version can be taken at face value.

So to conclude, I believe the two events are linked and both evidence official misinformation and choreography but for diametrically opposite reasons and purposes. In the case of Hebdo this was a public psycho-op to influence public opinion against Islamist and “ISIS” world view and for greater state intervention and repression against them and colaterally the French population although this is kept carefully hidden. In the case of Chevaline the objective is opposite but related: to HIDE the facts and to neutralise identified individuals with probable Muslim State or historical terror links essentially against Jews or the Jewish state of Israel. In both cases the people doing the killing show incontrovertible evidence of military training. Who the people were firing the guns is not at all clear but in both cases it is highly likely they have received official protection whilst others have been blamed. Oh just one other common factor: the hero. Every such event has to have one. In Chevaline it was of course (before even the full facts were known) BWM; in Hebdo we had at least two – Lilian Lepere and Lassana Bathily who rather conveniently came from Mali (comments passim). Not to mention the need for the “sacrificial lamb” the significance surely does not need to be explained, always appears as well from Kennedy’s assassination (the policeman, ditto Boston, ditto Hebdo plus others including son of leading Jewish N African cleric).

Same murky coterie of people ready to kill to secure the strategic objective in which one way or another a variety of Western states are implicated.


The car location analysis is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSkXiv_XHac


Craig Murray 13.2.15 Michael Norton
12 Feb, 2015 – 3:23 pm as with most of the Chevaline case, the situation as regards post mortems has not been clearly described. The investigating/prosecuting authorities both sides of the Channel, have been intentionally opaque in this case. I have often posed the question why this was so, and challenged it but of course no one takes any notice of me. They had a perfect opportunity with the first anniversary “press conference” that was no such thing. Indeed EM got quite annoyed when asked a few simple questions. The second anniversary press conference, when given the official opinion that this was the “perfect crime unlikely to be solved”, the rationale for with-holding information was even less. Specifically it is not clear what autopsies were carried out in France on whom and more importantly what the findings were in detail. It is not clear if the requirement to embalm the English/Swedish/Iraqi victims was imposed before they were transferred to Britain. (It is not inconceivable that this requirement was lifted at the request of the British authorities) Nor are we absolutely sure whether the Home Office pathologist went to France and worked independently or in consort with his French opposite number, or whether with or without this, he performed a second quite separate examination when they were back in Britain. These questions obviously have important practical implications. We remember the way in which Princess Diana was embalmed thus making the issue of pregnancy impossible subsequently to resolve. In a number of respects the consequences would have been the same with the Al Hillis if it had been done, for example. There was an opportunity for all this to be definitively cleared up at the British Coroner’s Inquest but as far as I am aware it wasn’t. It throws up the question what right does the public have to know. In practice, none. The information is regarded as belonging to the state in both countries, who are under no obligation to reveal what they know. Some may be revealed but unless someone presses the Coroner, around whom there is a theoretical principle of transparency, it may never be revealed to the general public. I believe the Inquest was managed in such a way to reveal certain facts but maintain secrecy surrounding the most important ones. It was designed to give the impression of openness and rigour, when the opposite was actually the case. So what do we make of all this? Basically your questions MN remain unanswered and may continue to be so. Unless they are WE shall never be able to get a better picture of what happened and perhaps why. As long as there is uncertainty and only speculation the perpetrators are safe, unless the authorities successfully pursue them, which seems not to be the case. From my own memory of events it was announced that autopsies would be carried out in France immediately following. From the British Inquest it would appear likely a second independent autopsy was carried out in Britain on three of the four victims. What is clear, and has never been explained, is how the British and French reports of injuries from bullets could be so significantly different nor what other tests were carried out on the bodies or witnesses in either country. The details of the differences I discussed at the time the Coroner’s Inquest was reported in the media so won’t tire you by repeating even if I could remember them!




Tim Veater

12 Apr, 2015 - 12:37 am


Suhayle Saadi they certainly have the capability and probably have been engaged in similar missions wrapped in secrecy so we seldom learn about them, but I think the way the British reacted after the event rather suggests it wasn’t a British operation. In fact I think it caught them off guard though the UK govt appears to have been complicit in the cover up. I believe it knows but can’t say because to do so would reveal its own clandestine operations and would cause an earthquake in its Franco/US/Israeli diplomatic relations.

Now of course I have high lighted the FORTY YEAR anniversary, almost to the hour, of the Munich Massacre, which linked to OPERATION WRATH OF GOD a targeted assassination programme over at least the next twenty years, possibly longer, and the location of the Al Hilli/Mollier killings in the Combe d’Ire is highly circumstantially suggestive of a connection. The chances of this and other links being otherwise is just too small.

Now another ‘co-incidence’ with another strange twist that may be new to you, partly because the latter part of it has only recently been played out. First, of course it was not only forty years (to the day from the massacre in Munich – and consider the earlier Munich echoes such as the agreement by that name signed in the early hours of 30 September 1938 and where the Nazi Party was founded in 1919) but it was forty years to a repeat Olympic Games, this time in LONDON, running from 25 July to 12 August 2012, less than a month prior to the killings.


The Olympic event was considered a great success and it passed off peacefully without major incident. However this is not the whole story. Behind the scenes there were big problems on security and in the end the army had to be brought in besides alleged missile cover on the top of neighbouring buildings. There was also a very noticeable militarisation of the police that has been blamed on Muslim extremism but may in fact have been focused on other threats.

Now the recent ‘twist’ that may have more substance to it than meets the eye and has been admitted. It relates to the trial and imprisonment of Michael Shrimpton for an alleged nuclear bomb hoax at the Olympics. See here:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2828974/Barrister-bomb-hoax-calls-Defence-Secretary-claiming-London-2012-Queen-targets-court-hears.html


He telephoned MP Philip Hammond to tell him that a bomb stolen from a sunken Russian submarine had been smuggled into the country and could be used to blow up the opening ceremony of the London Olympics and kill the Queen! This might appear fantastical were it not for the fact that Shrimpton was a Barrister and part time judge who had high level contacts with the security services. He gained notoriety for making uncontested revelations about Ted Heath’s (gay) sex life including his connections with Savile and the disappearance of young men from childrens’ homes. Some take the view that the charges were actually about shutting him up.

Whether the substantive issue of a nuclear device in London, and whether as claimed the Americans unilaterally seized and disarmed it, have never been properly discussed or settled. Nevertheless the fact that less than a month after the games ended SAH set off almost certainly for a meeting deep in France probably at the behest of British SS, may not be unconnected.




Tim Veater

12 Apr, 2015 - 1:24 am


Then just too spookily 1919 to 2012 of course equals 93 years. 93 years since the formation of the Nazi Party; 74 years since the Munich Agreement; and 40 years since the Munich Massacre. Strangely at his trial Shrimpton refused to reveal his sources but said they included ‘someone in MUNICH who lunches with the Pope.’


I have discussed the central importance of 40 before but I will spare you again. However 93 has particular significance to a subject that has gained great notoriety in recent years – that of satanic ritual abuse and its alleged infiltration to the highest levels of the elite, that has again raised its head in Hampstead. I will resist the temptation to detail how a secret world of sex and worse has been used to blackmail and control national and international policy and events.


The number 93 is of great significance in Thelema, a religious philosophy founded by English author and occultist Aleister Crowley in 1904 with the writing of The Book of the Law. He and it hold a central position in the whole occult/masonic world. “In the Greek language, they are Thelema (Will) and Agape (Love). Using the Greek technique of isopsephy, which applies a numerical value to each letter, the letters of each of these words add to 93.”93 has become a kind of shorthand for, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.” See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/93_%28Thelema%29


Moving on at first sight 74 appears to offer little significance except for this: 74 is the number of the French department of Haute-Savoie! Well there’s a thing.


Tim Veater

12 Apr, 2015 - 12:46 pm


Just to continue on that line of thinking Suhayl (and anyone else following it!) I and no doubt others, in our various ways, have tried to sift fact from fantasy, truth from lies, piecing together whatever fragments that have escaped from those in the know or have been discovered by others, to create a convincing explanation of events, which from the first have been tantalising. Many theories have been expounded but none have quite fitted the lock to let us into the inner sanctum. As with the lock on my bike, sometimes in the dark we just have to keep trying combinations until we find the one that fits, allowing it to spring open.

I have long argued, in common with many others, that this case went far beyond a domestic, random murder, that involved clandestine activities at a national governmental level. This was confirmed from the first by the quite exceptional response by the British Government. The fact that this was not even considered a possibility and considerable effort was put into trying to sell an alternative explanation, full of false trails and misinformation (in common parlance -appropriately a French derivation – lies) confirmed it, in my mind at least. Others continued to pour scorn on the idea.

Of course since then we have witnessed a series of quite extraordinary ‘terrorist'(?) events around the world, recently culminating as far as France is concerned in Hebdo and Flight 9525, neither of which have had convincing official explanations, and may well have been ‘False Flag’ events to add to all the others in the last decade and a half. Certainly it would appear that France, in sharp contrast to other European nations at the moment, appears to be the focus of attention, although of course 9525 was a German plane with mainly German passengers. It cannot be co-incidental can it, that France/Germany have provided a phalanx of opposition to American/Zionist snooping on the one hand and confrontation on the other, not to mention the pro-Palestinian and Iranian stance? The far east targets (you may have noticed that Michael Shrimpton (you can hear him being interviewed by Tony Gosling here:https://wewhoopposedeception.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/michael-shrimpton-on-tony-goslings-radio-and-its-analysis-in-a-british-german-soviet-light/) suggested Fukushima was caused by a nuclear explosion linked to his London Olympic claims?) Malaysia similarly fell foul of the CIA/Mossad caucus that some have linked to MH370 and MH17.

So, getting back to Shrimpton’s main thesis and whether this might throw some light on Chevaline, he appears to place most of the West problems on a rump Hiterian National Socialist Secret Service which he claims got control of both British and American politics and intelligence organisations using in large part incriminating sexual proclivities. It is perhaps no accident, and incidentally a confirmation that his interpretation is not wholly preposterous, is that the prosecution included a charge of down-loading under-age pornography, that he later proved was added AFTER the equipment was seized. Never the less the Bucks Herald in a comprehensive character assassination job on behalf of the government, headlined him as “Pervert Barrister”. (see: http://www.bucksherald.co.uk/news/more-news/jail-for-pervert-barrister-who-said-nuclear-bomb-would-blow-up-the-queen-at-the-london-olympics-1-6566127) In such manner, individuals speaking inconvenient ‘truths’ are disposed of in Britain today. (You might also like to read an article I did on ‘In Terrorem’ here:http://veaterecosan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/interrorem-exposed-ifthese-labouring.html)

Anyways….. here’s the Chevaline extension to his take on the world of espionage and intrigue. What if it was linked to that alleged plot in London, that if it had been carried would have challenged 9/11 for impact. Or was it being used for blackmail purposes? What if that fateful trip to France by the Al Hillis was a MI5/6 attempt to get to the bottom of it on the promise of information? If it had happened, it’s pretty sure it would have been blamed on either Iran or Russia as a false flag, the consequences of which would have been unimaginable. Could it explain Mollier’s role as an agent of German intelligence embedded in nuclear technology and France/Iran relations? Mollier father and son appear to have strong nation/socialist links in the mould of Le Pen currently subject to deep division between father and daughter on the subject of WWII treatment of the European Jews. Nor can we overlook the ties between Germany and Israel supplying nuclear powered submarines.

The killings were as much a gesture as they were retribution. Britain, France and Germany all struck in one operation? This may not be as fanciful as it first appears.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.