Monday, 23 May 2011

Hide & Seek

Dear Kate McCann, I apologise for writing to you twice with such a short interval, but I'm finding myself in dire need of your help.

As I promised I’ve started to read your book.

And it has shown to be one of the most aching, agonizing, excruciating, harrowing, torturing, wrenching and traumatic experiences of my life.

What a naive fool I was in thinking that it would be a quick read!!! It’s been a arduous, gruelling, laborious, punishing and toilsome nauseating task… and I’m only on page 42.

So why do I need your help? It’s all got to do with our Brit friend.

You know the one that was practically forced by me to buy your book so that I could have one. Talk about masochism. On my part, that is, for our friend has proven, as always, to be the selfless and altruistic soul that we know her to be.

Since it’s been four days that I have the book, the friend has asked me one question, and to answer it, I do need your help: “HAVE YOU NOTICED THAT THERE’S NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT MADDIE’S COLOBOMA IN THE ENTIRE BOOK?”

Honestly, my jaw dropped.

Please do help me out, and please DO tell me that you DIDN’T forget to mention about what your hubby has defined as a “good marketing ploy”, that mark, or better said, trademark, by which Maddie has become known worldwide?

A face recognized anywhere, so much so that that particular mark is perfectly visible in photo you chose for the cover of your book.

Because after reading all the details about your pregnancies (I shudder just to think that your “lovemaking chapter” may go into similar detail, I really do hope not!) it’s impossible that you would forget to speak about the MAIN physical characteristic by which someone would NOW be able to recognize your daughter.

You had so much time to prepare the content, so it would be completely ludicrous for you to forget that, wouldn't it?

After all it is ALL about that that your book is about, isn’t it?

To help others find your daughter, right? The eight year old girl with a COLOBOMA in her right eye, supposedly abducted 4 years ago.

This is where you come in. As I’ve told you, I’m on page 42. At this rhythm, tomorrow, by this time, I’ll be on page 50, being the optimistic that I am. That means, only in June will I will be able to provide my friend an answer.

That would be very rude on my part, wouldn’t it?

So, in order to allow me to answer my friend in a timely manner, could you, dear Kate, please direct us to which page(s) of your book is your daughter’s COLOBOMA referred to?

 Awfully grateful,

Your… Textusa

Update, May 24th:  

Kate, Now I’m really getting annoyed. I’ve only been able to reach page 47 up to now.

I'm continuously getting interrupted by our Brit friend: Have you seen that she doesn’t speak about this? Noticed that she says nothing about that? I love her, honestly I do, but she’s starting to become bothersome...

These are some of the things she mentioned that you forgot to write about:

- No mention of either of the Quiz Nights.
- No mention of free wine.
- No mention of the round table, much less of the BIG ROUND TABLE
- No mention of having argued with Gerry over his lack of attention caused by a woman, that made you sleep in Maddie’s bedroom, something that your husband didn’t even notice.
- No mention of washing Maddie’s Cuddle Cat.
- No mention of the stolen wallet incident.
- No mention of you having a best mate now although you did have one at school.
- No mention of the family trip to the beach.
- No mention of the lunch with the Paynes.
- No mention of the tennis dinner.
- No mention of Gaspars

Is there anything else that you'd like to forewarn me that you've forgot besides Maddie's COLOBOMA?!?

That you did forget to even think when you wrote it, is pretty clear... so please don’t mention it.

You know, reading about a narcissistic, that one particularly dislikes, going on about shamelessly complementing himself (herself in this case) is a terribly hard task to undertake by just by itself, so I certainly don't need to have it further aggravated with all these interruptions.

The book has 383 pages.  

Did you write about anything relevant? 

Or are these topics reserved for Gerry’s yet unannounced upcoming book?

Does this book jog any memories by providing any new info?... Well apart from the stupid e-fits of random new suspects?

I tell you, if my friend interrupts me once again, I’m seriously thinking of suing you for misleading of public and false propaganda.

But I have to get through the thing first, don’t I? Give me a break, please!

And this was what our friend had to say up to now.

In her hurry she may have missed or overlooked something and I would be grateful to readers if they let us know what else has been missed, or if she, out of so many forgotten things, has mentioned something that you didn't forget after all…

We, in this blog, don't want to accuse of anything that you don't deserve to be accused of!

Friday, 20 May 2011

Maddie's Rights

Dear Kate,

 I’ve finally received the copy of your book. Where I live, the mail is kind of slow, one of a handful of disadvantages among countless blessings.

My friend in the UK has refused to accept any refund for the “blood-money” she has given for your work of questionable art but, at least, of unquestionable bad taste.

We in the blog all hope to find that the purchase of the book will be worth our friend's real SACRIFICE. I now know not how to repay but the only option I’m left with is to send my friend my copy of Amaral’s book, and wait for the McCann's Portuguese lawyers to comply with the a Sovereign Country’s Court’s decision, and finally release the copies of the withheld books.

Then I can ask my Portuguese friend who bought this one for me, to buy another. Back then my Portuguese friend also refused any money. I’m almost tempted to feed the idea of setting up a library just on offered books.

I only don’t do that because I have already set up one: my head is filled up with unforgettable memories shared with priceless friends.

I digress as always. No disrespect meant, as I would have to have the most minuscule particle of respect for you, which I don’t, to be able to have such intent.

Let it be clear that from me you will never, ever, be disrespected.

Back to your book, I’ve looked at it. Better yet, have looked at the cover and it confers with what was shown daily in The Sun.

I haven’t read it yet. It’s Friday and I don’t want to spoil my weekend. You, especially, do understand what I mean, as you, better than all, know exactly how nauseating your book is.

But once I laid my eyes upon the vile object, it immediately came to my mind the Miranda Right’s. You know, that phrase that we’ve heard so many times that we’ve forgotten that it’s applicable only in the US, and even there, has variances from State to State: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand these rights as they have been read to you?”

I believe the UK version is somewhat similar, at least in intent: “You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”

“You have the right to remain silent / You do not have to say anything, you chose not to. “Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of law/ Anything you do say may be given in evidence., that’s your book in a nutshell.

But whoever came up with the UK version, must of had you, Kate McCann, dead set in their minds when coming up with the wording.

You see, while the American version speaks about needing and providing a lawyer, which we all know is something that you’ve been able to achieve by the bucketful of the most expensive ones, the British version fits you just like a glove “it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court”.

Now let me tell you what I’ll be looking for in your book. When I read it that is.

First, I’ll be checking the whole Reservation Book Saga. What you say was written on it, who wrote what, where it was, where it was left and who may possibly have read it. Let me tell that some people have already told me that you here had some sort of hallucination, as they say you say that you see things that nobody else has been able to see. Don’t worry, I’ll only believe it when I see it myself.

Then, I’ll read what you have to say about those crucial moments when you, apparently, found out that Maddie was missing. You know all the wooshing and clanking, or clanking and wooshing, in whichever order you decided to put it in your book, if you did put it in.

I’m also very interested in the apparent sudden urge that Gerry had to play with the window, a completely "natural" reaction for a father to have when discovering that Peter Pan has just flown through that same window with his daughter just minutes before. The Sun does describe it, but I’m sure that in your book it will be much more entertaining.

I’ll also dedicate some attention to all those people that a group of unknown tourists in an unknown little town apparently had coming in and out of the apartment during that particular night. From what I’ve been told, it seems more like it was taken out of a WWII Britcom. It's like the whole Brit Community in PdL was on it’s toes for a Fire Drill Exercise, and, just like clockwork, as soon as you wailed the alarm, half of the town obediently rushed to the preset muster point. I do believe that in the book most of these people remain nameless, but we know who they are, don’t we?

Lastly, let me just tell you how interested I am in the “lovemaking chapter” of your book. That particular subject in a book about the ordeal of one’s supposedly abducted daughter is quite revealing. It says tons about one’s personality, but, more importantly, even more about the need of even having written it.

Also it absolutely "validates" the fact that, albeit my timely calling to your attention, Dianne Webster's pictures of the lot of you having dinner around the BIG ROUND TABLE at Tapas, weren't published in your book after all because they were TOO INTIMATE... 

I intend to skip all those parts in which you dedicate to your own belly-button, so, I expect, as of Monday, to be a quick read.

By the way, I’m not foreseeing the need to change a single word of what we’ve written in this blog thus far about the case due to your book.

We will use it, obviously, to even further incriminate you, as well as to confirm that your group of 9, alone, couldn’t get away with it without external help.

And do read “external”, as starting just outside the apartment...

Best regards, and do enjoy your trip to Portugal.

Your… Textusa  

Post Scriptum: 
I’m starting to think I owe an apology to Mr Cameron. He may just have proven to be smarter than I initially thought.

The McCanns asked for help, but as a reader has commented, did they really want it? At least the way they got it? You see, by ”asking” the Met to look into the case, he has made aware, for those he knows more attentive, for the possibility of the Yard to “find” something.

This will certainly ease off some pressure from certain “privileged” quarters that have played "this game" by their own rules, but now do have to simmer down, so as not to run the risk of the broil spilling over...

Also, by “proposing” instead of “directing” he allows the Met not to come up with any result. They’ll look at the case very attentively, and then... look at it again, and if required, look at it as many times as they have to look at it, to really have a good look at it.

This is not good for the McCanns.

Cameron has now pinned them to the role they deserve to be in: mere pawns in the game. They go where they are moved, and pray that the bigger pieces, don’t find them appetizing enough for the next move in the permanent and endless game of power gaining where the two set of players gladiate mercilessly: the influential and the politicians.

Both REALLY powerful although the latter, living basically on opportunity and chance, are in a much more fragile position than the first.

 Now just imagine what life has become for the McCanns from now on.

Until now, they’ve spent each day looking over their shoulder to watch out for disdainful stares of all those who know them to be guilty but feel powerless before the powerful. Unpleasant but completely harmless.  

But now the game has changed. Now they still have to spend each day watching over their shoulder but now be completely and absolutely focused on who is looking. This time for survival reasons. Each second of their time is now to analyze what benefit they represent to a certain “rook”, or a certain “knight”, “bishop”, “queen” or even “king” to be unceremoniously kicked out of the board in a particular moment of time… which, for example, could be tomorrow.

Humiliating would be to be kicked out by another pawn... but that is a likely scenario, as they are the most numeric pieces on the board, aren't they, and very few reach the end of the game, so now they're all fighting for survival, aren't they?

And what’s the difference between this and a normal chess game? It’s the fact that the McCanns, in this case, are completely colourless. They are neither Black, nor White.

A very, very unpleasant position to be found in...

For example, suppose that in their forthcoming visit to Portugal, to promote Kate's book, “escorted” by the Yard, they're "asked”, out of the blue, to go down to PdL and perform a “surprise” reconstruction.

Wouldn’t that be fun? Just picture all those people literally jumping out of their chairs...

I have to stop to voice out my dreams…

Saturday, 14 May 2011

CONTROL Calling Maddie, Over...

As one of our readers pointed out, according to The Sun a “Labour peer” has branded the Met Maddie case review a waste of money.

The “Labour peer” is none other than Lord Harris, a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority.

No10 has hit back saying that it was “made "a request, not a direction" for a review.

The Met confirmed, through Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson that it “was asked, not told, to provide expertise”.

If I were the PM, I knew what I would do. I would contact CONTROL and dispatch at once Agents 86 (Maxwell Smart) and 99 right down to the Algarve, where Edgar has spotted the lair where the KAOS HQ is located, and free Maddie to the glory of all.

Even a world respected and renown institution such as the Scotland Yard, had to be dragged into this mess…

Friday, 13 May 2011


I’ve been quite disappointed. The days preceding the Kate's book's publication were exciting and promising, and I was expecting that Yesterday would climax into something grandiose.

It didn’t.

One British PM doesn’t make an exciting day since the so much missed “Yes, Minister” and “Yes, Prime Minister” days.

We thought the Media would be discussing today how mistreated were both the couple and the case by the incompetent Portuguese.

That we’d have new refreshing passages about how Edgar had come brilliantly to the conclusion that there was a lair somewhere near PdL.

Looking back now, it was probably Edgar and his “lair” that outset Kate’ terrible, and quite graphic, nightmares.

And we’re talking about those she has only when she’s NOT looking into a mirror or any other surface that might reflect her face back at her, as then, I imagine, no other possible nightmare could try to occupy her mind besides that terrifying one right before her.

So I stocked up on popcorn, dimmed the lights, told Fred he would just have to shush up as I couldn’t care less if May was Champion’s League month, and glued my eyes to the little screen.

And what for? For the UK PM to tell me that he is to review a case where he has no jurisdiction upon, and to tell me that the Scotland Yard are NOW going to get their hands FINALLY in the case, and, surprise, surprise, we’re now learning, have intended to do so, secretly, for the last nine months.

Let’s then pretend that we don’t know that the Yard has been on it since May 2007, around about the same time as all other existing UK Police force, then and now.

We’ll just look awed and pretend that we've forgotten that Jose de Freitas, from the Met, was involved in 2007, and if memory doesn’t fail me, found some excuse not to come to the trial in Lisbon in January 2010

We’ll even pretend that they have all been looking for an abductor.

If the matter at hand wasn’t that serious and if we were all still in kindergarten, I would even say we have been watching a game of “cops-‘n-robbers reverse style” 

The Guardian in Yesterday's article "How the Met misled courts, parliament and public on phone hacking", by Nick Davies and Amelia Hill, is quite clear on how trustworthy the Yard has been: “The Royal Courts of Justice have heard hundreds of criminals claim that the police are bent. yesterday, it was a respectable group of public figures including three Cabinet Ministers and an erstwhile Police Chief who claimed that Scotland Yard had twisted the truth and buried the evidence in their case."

Let's hope that Scotland Yard, who now have some new women at the top of the force, will act with integrity in this matter.

If they will, they have a very easy task ahead of them. Complex, but simple. We’ll even give them a clue: it’s not only a couple, nor is it just a small group of 9, sitting or not, around a RESERVED BIG ROUND TABLE

But it’s not about the Met that we’re talking here today. We’re talking about… today.

You know, a pretty, pretty boring day, unlike expected.

What else did we have? Oh the usual and expected interviews with the usual and expected interviewers asking the usual and expected questions and all be nauseating as usual and expected, as is example this opinion from Chris Freind who has gracefully sent us.

And that’s basically it.

I will not get YET into the details of Kate’s book, because I haven’t been able yet to get hold of one.

About that a quite telling story did happen. I asked a friend of ours to buy me a copy. This friend first thought I was joking, but when I, again this morning, insisted, realized I was really serious, showed to be very, very reluctant to go and buy it.

My friend even joked about going to shoplift the book.

As far as I know, this friend has never, ever committed the slightest felony consciously, and was now joking about stealing a book! Probably using humour to detract me from my objective…

It was not because of being afraid of being seen buying it. This friend had been Yesterday at a bookstore (by the way, the bookkeeper didn’t know where exactly the book was when my friend asked for it) and had read through it without buying it, which seems to have been the most habitual technique for that particular book to be handled, as she commented on how she had conversed with other people present about the shamelessness of the whole thing.

So it wasn’t also about any kind of fear or shame of being seen reading it in public. It was just because it was, and still is, for my friend, disgusting to spend any amount of money on that particular product.

Thankfully, I convinced my friend that I would be paying for it, and it would lay on my conscience the evil deed.

And the book was bought in a 3 books for the price of 2 offer, so not exactly flying off the shelves

I’ll be waiting for my book then. Paid for. Unlike many, outside the UK, that have read Gonçalo Amaral’s book and not paid a cent for his effort and courage.

Only when I have it with me, will I provide an opinion about its content.

Now that I’m anxious to comment, I am! Especially after having read some very important contributions from the segments that we were allowed to see in the tabloids from what the authoress allegedly wrote. And I do hope to take the "allegedly" out of the previous sentence as soon as I may!

We do understand that our readers are anxious to know what is going through our minds at the moment.

Well, first of all, as I’ve told you, boredom and deception.

Second, a slight shake of the head on how Cameron let himself get caught up in this. There was no need.

And all it has achieved is that in the various fora UK is present, the shameful way the Nation has handled this Maddie Affair will always be there as the noise made by rubber soles on a wooden floor, needless and annoying, and the blatant revelation of the incapacity of choosing footwear in accordance with the floor one has to step on.

Third, I know you want to hear my opinion about this book, at this point in time.

I think it is the “last installment” that “The Club” (made up of all those swingers present and all their usual and IMPORTANT business transactions that do happen in these highly selective and by “invitation-only" events, as well as their hosts (let us not forget for a SINGLE second the hosts…)) that the McCanns are due, or have made it due to them during this time with the help of some friends in high places, that meanwhile, unfortunately for them, have stepped, or been pushed, down.

Kind of a mob-style “charming” operation of “Hey, ya listen well McCanns, this is the LAST favour YOU gonna get from us, capicce?".

So, in my opinion, this is it, the end of the road for the narcissistic, now desperate, couple, so they should make the most out of it as they can.

After this, the "boat" will just go down-stream as the current will take it to go… no more arms to man the oars.

The cold-shoulder given by the most of the media, and the best result, thus far, being a letter from the PM stating the obvious, although in very nice and polite terms as only politicians are capable of filling paragraphs with very little, I dare say, is very little.

By next week, either the book sales build up, or I’m seeing the McCann name starting to be slowly to be taken off the marquees… and then from all billboards. Now, the fact that the PM did respond, still indicates that those handling the strings, have not slackened their hold in any way.

But they’re just a little too tired of putting up with this shameless couple, and there are many out there that won’t forget how arrogant and narcissistic they have been, and how ungrateful they've shown also to be, leaving those that having protected them in a time they needed it, have found themselves needing protection themselves..

Saturday, 7 May 2011

Front Row Seats

Textusa’s blog will be taking a break

There are two reasons for this. The first, personal, to attend to business matters, the other, is to sit and watch very attentively the spectacle that has already began around and about Kate McCann’s book.

We, in the blog, set our own rhythm and do not act in accordance with what others would wish us to do. And what the Black Hats pretend from this book is to throw out bait, in their own timing and initiative, around a pond and have fun watching us “running” after it like crazy.

If we were to act just like a dog running after a stick, we would by doing it, be missing a lot of essential information, wouldn’t we? We would only be looking at the “stick”, where it was flying towards, and where it would eventually fall, and then, to the Black Hats’ gleeful enjoyment we would bring it "back" by starting discuss among us all the “ifs-and-not-ifs” as well as all the “whys-and-why-nots” of those facts literally thrown in our direction.

You’ve now know that we call this “stick-throwing” by the clutter that it is, aimed simply to distract and to add yet more clutter to the already humungous existing pile of trash.

You also know that we here have called, on various occasions, their “clutter-bluff”.

Only this time we have to see beyond their usual tactics. We now have also to see how their tactics are implemented. We have to see why a particular “stick” is picked in detriment of others near it at a particular point of time and why the specific timing for its use, as well as what was the posture and attitude of the thrower, all his/her reactions displayed while watching us wasting our time.

And these essential pieces of information, simply cannot be missed.

Because of that, we have to watch the thrower as well as all those playing in the “throwing-team”. And the spectacle, as we've said, as already began. So we’ll sit back, and let ourselves be, for now, silent spectators. Not uninterested, just very attentive and watchful.

And you, but most importantly them, know how well we pay attention to detail. To every detail. This will give us the opportunity to hear what Kate McCann has to say in her forthcoming book and incorporate anything relevant in future posts.

Unlike a chosen few, we have not been given an advance copy, but comments on other sites, from people who have obviously been briefed, lead us to believe Kate will not be having a go at the day that Maddie disappeared from our eyes, for that, "obviously" would be irrelevant to jog any memory from someone about facts that could have happened on that that day.

What really is important for Kate, it seems, is all that happened in the days, weeks and months after.

That day is too painful for her to remember, it seems. And we here, believe her. And understand exactly why it's so painful to remember...

Instead, it seems, she will have a go at the Portuguese side of the investigation. We might even see some “biting of the hand that has just fed you” and maybe see that the Leicester Police will also come in for some criticism… Now, that would bring a smile to our faces…

And talking about biting, it seems also that Kate’s main target will be that of the performance of the dogs and their handler, evidence which this blog has found unnecessary to mention yet to prove that the McCanns & friends are lying.

But, let’s sit back and watch whatever the most famous Rothley Lass has to say about the canines and how they helped or hampered the search of the missing girl, when they appeared on the scene two and half months after she was last seen

We await some clarification about David Payne's visit to see the angelic trio, hope for an introduction to some of the other diners they chatted to that night at the Tapas and some explanation as to the couple who came to comfort Kate the night that Madeleine disappeared; the man who told her not to worry, because he had gone missing for ten days as a child.

 We also hope she will also clarify the roles of the three priests in our previous post, The Holy Trinity.

And of course, we do hope to see, finally, Dianne Webster’s pictures of one of those Tapas Bar dinners of 9 friends around a BIG ROUND TABLE.

In reality, we anticipate being disappointed in our expectations. However, the absence of information, as in the withheld statements in the PJ files, may be just as significant.

The Black Hats will benefit from the break, as they have so much monitoring to do and comments to make on other sites. They amuse and irritate us in turn, but their comments are a valuable source of information in their own way and often guide the direction we may choose to take ahead.

In the meantime, you are welcome to submit your comments on the said book. Although they may not appear for a while, we can look at your contributions and consider how they may assist us with future postings.

As usual, gratuitous insults will not be published as they add nothing to the debate and try, unfruitfully, to lower the tone of the blog.
Post Sriptum 11May11, the day before Kate’s Book is to be published (we hope).
Like watching a comedy and then blaming the plot for the laughter caused, I confess that I have to state in clear terms that I do not blame Kate McCann for all or any choking I’ve suffered the lately with popcorn I've brought to the spectacle.

And what a show it has been. I knew that I if read and ate popcorn at the same time, I had a recipe for disaster, and so was confirmed that the inevitable happened: I choked, more often than desired, I must admit. The only sad part is that a couple of laughs were mistaken as cough attacks by friends, but that is not that serious, is it?
Let us just say that we agree with Christopher Freind’s post on Joana’s blog, with the obvious exception that we don’t think there was ever NEGLIGENCE. The remainder of the article is correct and to the point, and merits public recognition.
But tomorrow we have the book. Another wonderful mistake made by these people, that history won't let it pass by.
Before we’re to dissect what it says (because, it seems, we finally have a clear, thought out description of the events from one of its main participants) let me just give you a slight help, if I may, when you do find the time to read it, and that is to tell you that the book is not directed at you.

You see, the book, from what I’ve been able to see, between the tears caused by the coughing, this book is to make clear to other Black Hats that they have to continue to "cough" up, or, somebody will indeed do just that, and "cough up". At least that is the threat.

You see, since Jim Gamble has gone MIA, the BH camp that has been slowly falling apart, showing that it was always made up of many factions, and all is now dependent on how desperate some people do appear to REALLY be to others.

I think the rope is getting thinner by the minute, and some people are REALLY starting to be tired up with all this...

The Black Hats have, by now, painfully realized that leaving things in the hands of narcissists is as sensible as agreeing to pay blackmailers.

Irrelevant of how much you pay, and how many times you do it, they’ll always come back for more.

Lastly, dear Kate, few people await your book with as much anxiety as we do. I REALLY want to see FINALLY the printed word, with YOUR NAME on it, so that you, and your side, will no longer be able to say that the “tabloids just write whatever they want to write”, while using the the tabloids for your convenience.

And when you and your side won’t be able to say that, the other Black Hats sides won’t too, and we've long understood how much you’re hating each other, a sentiment growing exponentially with time…

And all that will just be making a very enjoyable movie plot to follow, which we won't miss, comfortably seated in our front row, coughing, or not, all the popcorn we can get our hands on.

Tuesday, 3 May 2011

The Flower that wasn't meant to Blossom in May

A Tribute to Maddie from .....  

"A Reminiscence"  

"And though thy transient life is o'er  
'Tis sweet to think that thou hast been"

An extract from a poem by Anne Bronte.

To any reader who reads the poem in its entirety, it was written about a dear friend of Anne Bronte's.

 In no way are we suggesting that the poem refers to the resting place of Madeleine.