Saturday, 27 November 2010

Circles of Lies

At this point in time, I propose that we stop and reflect for a minute.

Evidence shows clearly that Mrs Fenn was not truthful in her statement to the PJ.

What that means is much more relevant than the why she does it.

Later, I’ll give my opinion on that, although an Anon basically has summed it up quite adequately: “The time that she gave it is really interesting for me- It is when in UK, the DNA was under test, PJ was in standby waiting for the results and the British tabloids very busy trying to bring some entropy to the public to dismiss the work of the police and blame PJ.” 

By the way, addressing, just for a moment, those that promote the idea that I dislike or mistreat those who disagree with me, as I write these words, I basically disagree with this Anon’s opinion on Carol Tranmer-Fenn.

While Anon thinks she’s as much a phony as her aunt, I think otherwise. But this Anon has presented pretty good arguments to back up his/her opinions, so, valid contributions that they are, they will be savored carefully as any good food for thought is to be.

And if I had as goal proving that (s)he’s wrong, I would be making the same mistake many accuse me of, and, unfortunately, some do make it.

The idea is to assimilate the information given, which I hereby thank, overlap it with my perception of the facts portrayed and reach a personal conclusion, to the best of my capacity, as to what is valid information and what isn’t.

The result might be that what I thought was, may not have been, or was not at all; or what I thought may have been, now is. It’s personal and it’s subjective. So, if in a near future I insist on Carol’s honesty that is not to be taken neither as sign of stubbornness, nor that of weakness if I question what she has said.

At the right time in life I enjoyed, plentifully I may add, my childhood days. I threw the tantrums I should have and my life’s purpose was to make my parent’s one as miserable as possible just because.

Those times are gone. Even the times when I suffered the reverse of the "teen-coin" have gone too. I now help those, my grandchildren, whose turn it is to make life terrible for others, their parents.

Here however, time is for maturity and realization of the seriousness of the issue handled and the responsibility assumed. Egos must be set aside.

I’ve been, I think so at least otherwise there would be no point in my writing, right up to now, not because I’m smarter than you, but because I 've done things very slowly and carefully, and because I don't jump to conclusions and am not afraid to listen.

Oh, also for having have called the Black Hats threatening bluffs from the first minute.

I’m fully aware that I'm not the owner of the truth. I said it before, that it's not, nor I assume it is, to hand out Justice. But I'm entitled to an opinion and have the right to express it.

Sometimes, I feel that the some pieces simply don’t fit the puzzle. When that happens, either I just put them aside, or I clearly warn that I’m speculating.

Learned with my mistake when, initially, in my theory, I wrongly stated, although I felt something wasn't right when I said it (as later I thoroughly explained) that the Smith Sighting was Gerry McCann disposing of Maddie’s body.

By the way, that theory is full of mistakes, but, before you trash it, its backbone remains as valid today as it did on the day I wrote it.

And talking about Mr. Smith, there was still a piece or two that remained lying around. These, whenever I “forced” them into the puzzle, made others fell out. As all the others fitted with perfection, the mistake could only be in the way I was forcing them in.

So I just put them a aside, and waited until they made sense. Help from surprising sources, have now clarified those issues, and I will, one of these days, and when opportune, place these pieces in their rightful place, to the sadness of some but happiness of most, I hope.

But today, as I said, is time for reflection. On what means Mrs Fenn having lied.

Disregard for a moment both her motives and her pretended message. Concentrate simply what really is implied if she’s, in fact, lying.

Imagine that you hold a magic pencil, with which you’re able to draw Circles of Lies.

To draw any of these Circles, you have to understand the reasons why all those that you put inside it have to lie.

Only then can you group people, because, basically that’s what you’re doing.

It’s then easy to draw the Circle of Lie around Kate and Gerry. We all know that it’s pretty hard to find a word of truth uttered by a McCann mouth, as they lie so blatantly and candidly.

 It’s also easy to draw the Circle of Lie around the Tapas, as their inconsistencies will baffle mathematicians for a long time to come.

But with Mrs Fenn, this task suddenly stops being easy.

With Mrs Fenn we have someone that is outside the inner Circles of the McCanns & Tapas, and outside the slightly larger Circle of “casual” tourists, like Wilkins.

We’re before a PdL resident, owner of an apartment, and apparently with no reason whatsoever to lie.

With this Mrs Fenn phenomenon, you’re faced with a big problem, and that is, if she’s lying, where on earth does the lying stop?

You simply just don’t know how large a Circle you have to draw to include this particular lady.

Do you remember when I said that the PJ Files were simply filled with FACTS of said facts? The incomprehensibility of Fenn’s lying depicts not a situation of implausibility but one where all the borders of credibility simply have vanished from where they were.

But the borders are there, just not where you thought they were.  

Mrs Fenn’s statement proves that one has to be very careful before assuming where the truth lies, and be very “forgiving” on where one where one decides to draw the line in any PdL’s Circle of Lie.

And no one is to be exempted, isn’t that so Mr. Smith?

Do have a nice weekend.


  1. google translator:

    Good morning, and also my wishes for a good weekend.

    Do well to disclose their reasoning. Think and makes you think. It is always good. Thinking only makes fine. And your thoughts are always gentle and polite.
    All the arguments that lead us to truth and justice are to be commended.
    His writings, to me, very helpful. Thank you very much. And thank you that any character in this case, Madeleine, is always full of importance. Even, apparently, is "not important"!


  2. I come here, like many, everyday to see what you've discovered next. Please just don't stop. You are making them very nervous because you're slowly unfolding a lie that PROFESSIONALS took so much time and effort to build. And we're talking about people besides the rich and powerful, from media, from the police (LC and CEOP), form the UK Justice Sytem (and from the Portuguese), from the UK government itself (and the Portuguese). People lied because they had ALL this backing! And you are uncovering this plot like a novel, keeping us coming back here for we are sure that if we don't get to the truth, at least we'll have a pretty good idea of what really happened. Thank you. Keep it up and don't mind those that envy that brain of yours.

  3. "And no one is to be exempted, isn’t that so Mr. Smith?"

    Oh my goodness! Is Mr. Smith's testimony next in line to be proven as unrtruthful?! It's getting a bit too much for me, "muita areia para a minha camioneta"...


  4. Anon 3:58

    Rest assured that whatever relevant was said in this blog about the Smith Sighting remains untouched, as it should, as nothing was written here lightheartedly.

    Shall we say, that I'm referring to some lose ends, that will help further understand this whole thing.

  5. Textusa ( i hope You can use g.trans.):

    Estou com curiosidade acerca do que virá. Muito apreciável o que escreve.

    Penso que não sou de modo algum como o menino Pedro da Selva. Um bocado atrapalhado, só para não dizer o que é.

    Waiting for nice post and a good weekend....


  6. O anon das 3: 58............ trabalha para a agência de publicidade daquele casal que diz ter perdido a menina.

    Para mim , a menina perdeu foi a vida. Coitadinha dela.

    Isabel Marinho

  7. Testusa

    Yes - don't stop whatever reaction you are getting. I am all ears - if as Anon @ 11.43 says you are unravelling this case, and someone needs to, it will take someone with brains enough to works this back to why Madeleine had to disappear/or was disappeared. As they said, this touches a wide amount of areas, government, media, LP and PJ, but he/she left one out - Business links.

    I wonder though at CTF's statements. There is one point that sounds as though she is contradicting herself.

    Have a good weekend.


  8. And Brian Kennedy? Why he got so involved on the saga? Why he travelled to Portugal to have a word with Murat? Have he travelled also to have a word with Mrs. Fenn or the Smiths?

  9. Isabel,

    Anon 3:58 seems more to be expressing confusion with what Tex is implying. S/he has our brains in knots. We're still trying to grasp and understand how Fenn who we took for one of "us" suddenly becomes one of "them" and Tex now says that Smith who we also took as "playing" in our team, might not exactly be so. When Tex said that McStroller was GM with Tanner's kid, we frowned, and s/he explained how it was. Then s/he said that the Tanner sighting was real, his/her version is plausible, very plausible. Next, Tex was insulted by many for saying what s/he said about Fenn... now s/he's "warning" about Smith, so there's something up that sleeve we don't know. Is it MS's refusal to the second statement? Textusa just is keeping us tense and very hard to follow all the ideas and connections and non-connections put out. I also say "help!!!", not against Tex, but not to be left behind for not being able to follow.

  10. Good evening all,
    I'm anon. 3:58, and I assure you I'm NO pro-McCann! The only McCann I support and wish justice for is Madeleine! I'm sorry if my comment came through negatively, you see, I'm portuguese and have some dificulty in putting my thoughts in proper english, sometimes it doesn't come out the best way, and that can lead to dubious interpretations. My knowledge of english is limited (by the way, sorry for the misspellings!) and it is never a good idea to think in portuguese and translate into english, it's bound to come out "twisted"!
    Thanks to anon.11:27, she/he understood me, right on the money:
    -I'm "at sixs and sevens", I admit I do not have a brain as sharp as Textusa's and Ironside and many others here, I do the best I can to follow,'s not easy. Textusa is very "cryptic", but that's fine, it keeps us on our toes, and as Poirot himself would say it puts the "little grey cells" to work, so, THANK YOU TEXTUSA!

    Part of Lift Consulting, ME???!!!
    Would be like selling my soul to the devil!

  11. Textusa ,you´re brilliant as ever!

  12. Hello everyone, Jane Tanner sight about the abductor carrying a child could be real( I meant somebody passing on the time she was on the street ). This did not mean a strange passing. She could be exactly and in porpose, on the street, to see what she claim she saw- an abductor. The only difference is that she knows the abductor and the abductor was Gerry Mccann. What she don't know, is who else saw somebody passing at the same time as the sight was prepared. Then, better don't lie and keep the fingers cross that who saw something was not able to recognise the abductor. Remember the lights of the street? Remember how narrow was the street? Easy to control strange passengers. What was done was not an act isolated done by one person. They need at least 4. One to stay with kids, one to control the street, one to carry the child and one to recieve it. Tanner could be the controler.
    Then come Wilkins. Innocent or planted? that is the question. He could be who saw the same as Tanner and did not realise the situation untill the alarm was raised. After, he could been falling in two worlds: Telling the truth, what he saw, or play the roll as many witnesses play in car accident, he saw nothing. After all, from where was coming Gerry when meet him? from the 5A or from somewhere else? That was the second question.
    Kate did not imagine how amazing his combing the investigation that is available. If she was clever, she must do it instead of publishing a book with more lies. They will fall on the mouths rat, trough their own hands.
    And remember Mrs. wilkin's providing the media with a so important information to kill the reputation of the police? They knock on her door with a wrong picture asking if she knows Madeleine, the girl that disappear. I will have a look at what is available regarding the Wilkin's. The Sun is amazing with that contra-information they provide for quite long time. when we put the contra-information of the british tabloids on top of other truthful sources, we are able to see underlines and understand what could be the truth. Off course nobody here is the owner of the truth. we are discussing possiblities. The only one who know the Truth are the Mccann's(almost the all familly), the Tapas 7 and God( to who believe on him).

  13. smith knows murat..blimey they all know each wonder they went to PDL for hols.
    gerald mccann says 'one good thing is that there is much information out there no-one knows what is true and what isn't'.


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.