Colouring Hats With A Crayon

Today I want you, if you'll pamper me, to do a pre-school activity: colouring.

Please go and find yourself a black crayon. The blackest, pitch black crayon you can find. Got it? Good.

I’ll tell you in a minute what I want you to colour.

Or rather, I want you to choose between two apparently identical objects, which one to colour.

Let’s do then the exercise.

I was alerted to something interesting. To an episode as similar as to what happened with Sidmouth back in day.

If you don’t remember, this character, Sidmouth, admitted, as we showed in our Textusa Meltdown post, that he had been at Tapas during the time Maddie disappeared.

He vanished from the internet very soon after that. Inexplicably… or then, maybe not.

The Textusa Meltdown post was also able to produce, besides making disappear the said character, another very interesting effect on the BHs. They momentarily forgot to remember what they were supposed to believe about Mrs Fenn, as we showed in our Black Shoelaces post.

Strangely enough, today’s post, revolves around Mrs Fenn, as well as the unpublished PJ Files, and how, unexpectedly, dots do connect to each other and how the world is a small place after all, indeed.

Let’s start by the timelines of the events in question, and this story begins Mon 26 Dec - 13:01, when our friend loopdaloop decides to start a thread on MMF.

Loopdaloop calls the thread “Whats the story/conspiracy with Mrs Fenn?”

This is his/her opening comment:

“Hey,
I followed a link to textusa and ended up on the following pagehttp://textusa.blogspot.com/2011/03/mysteries-of-non-cryptic-photograph.html
and there appears to be some conspiracy with regards to Mrs Fenn, but I don't understand why?
What is the motivation to denigrate a random witness and why is she apparently key?
Thanks.”
I won’t repeat myself about what I think to be the colour of the hat worn by someone who asks “What is the motivation to denigrate a random witness", when referring to Mrs Fenn, but I can tell it’s none of those in a rainbow. For a rainbow to appear, you need light, not darkness.

But loopdaloop is not the central figure of this post. We’re just referring to him/her because, s/he just happens to cross our path again this time… and it was him/her that did start this thread.

The thread then follows its course and basically dies down on Dec 29th, with a comment from Panda at 15:40, and I’ll abstain to comment ithe content of the thread until then, with the exception of this particular "last" comment and only to say it was about the use of the cell phones by both Kate and Gerry.

On Jan 9th, this year, we published the post “No More Doubts” where we stated why we think that the SY Review was nothing but another whitewashing maneuver executed by the system, and which, in our opinion only shames an institution supposedly full of prestige.

One of the commentators of that particular post was loopdaloop. That was our first contact with the indivual, at least with this identity.

His/her comment deserved on our part a follow-up post called “To Follow or Not To Follow” on Jan 12th. Loopdaloop seemed to thinks that SY Review is genuine, we didn't, and don't, and explained why, but then again loopdaloop also thinks Mrs Fenn is a “a random witness” , we don’t, and have repeatedly explained why.

You do the math, and reach a conclusion about the colour of the hat on this individual’s head.

Then, on Jan 23rd, we published our “Debunking Urban Myths: The Unpublished PJ Files”.

This post merited publication in the MMF, on that same day. This was done by Annabel, a mod at that the forum, and she chose to do that it the thread initiated by loopdaloop. And her comment, inserting the post in the thread, was pretty simple and straightforward:

http://textusa.blogspot.com/2012/01/debunking-urban-myths-unpublished-pj.html

Later, it was edited, whereby Annabel having chosen some excerpts from the post, placed them in the comment. This was done, as per said in the thread, “Last edited by Annabel on Tue 24 Jan - 8:14; edited 1 time in total”

But before Annabel’s editing, that’s where things start to get interesting.

Let’s start with Panda’s, a very active poster at MMF, first reply to Annabel’s comment/post. It was “on Mon 23 Jan 2012, 10:28”, after the initial publication, but before the editing.

So only the link was visible when Panda wrote the following:

“Thanks Annabel.....
The lady I travelled to Gatwickwith, living in Faro who turned out to be a friend of Mrs Fenn friend said, the Ocean Staff had called
out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a, so Gerry's "it felt like dining in your garden " was rubbish.”
Now, ask you, what in the heck has this to do with the “Unpublished PJ Files”? If you won’t, let me tell you that I did.

Could it be a follow up of her latest comment made on Dec 29th? It doesn’t appear to be the case, because, as said, that one had been about phone usage.

She thanks Annabel… for what? The post does mention Mrs Fenn, but isn’t at all about her. I used her to prove a point, that’s all.

My first reaction was to think she was diverting attention. If that was the intention, then the result would surely be fruitless, because, others do comment about the “Unpublished PJ Files”, with the usual certainty of those that are absolutely sure of what they say. Who can contradict the irrefutable “everyone knows”? No one, of course. As for me, an individual part of that great “everyone”, I got, from then on, to know something new, something I didn’t know before but was then informed that I did. Most grateful.

So what does Panda thank Annabel for? For linking a post about Mrs Fenn. That’s it. I know, speaking about Mrs Fenn on a post about unpublished PJ Files, is almost as appropriate as speaking about the grooves of the left front tire of a bus, when the issue is whether hybrid cars are the future or not… the connection is not that obvious, but it’s there if you really want to see it…

But this comment was only the first interesting part of very interesting participations. Do read on how this issue develops:

Christine on Mon 23 Jan 2012, 10:36
Panda wrote:Thanks Annabel.....The lady I travelled to Gatwickwith, living in Faro who turned out to be a friend of Mrs Fenn friend said, the Ocean Staff had called
out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a, so Gerry's "it felt like dining in your garden " was rubbish.

That may be the reason why Mrs Fenns friend (forgot her name) said 'I'm not surprised' when Mrs Fenn called her the evening of the crying incident. I never understood that reaction.


ann_chovey on Mon 23 Jan 2012, 11:15
Christine wrote:
Panda wrote:Thanks Annabel.....The lady I travelled to Gatwickwith, living in Faro who turned out to be a friend of Mrs Fenn friend said, the Ocean Staff had called
out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a, so Gerry's "it felt like dining in your garden " was rubbish.
That may be the reason why Mrs Fenns friend (forgot her name) said 'I'm not surprised' when Mrs Fenn called her the evening of the crying incident. I never understood that reaction.
Edna Glynn I think is her name. The 'I'm not surprised' comment was always a red flag to me. (i.e. the crying was nothing new)


Panda on Mon 23 Jan 2012, 11:22
Christine wrote:
Panda wrote:Thanks Annabel.....The lady I travelled to Gatwickwith, living in Faro who turned out to be a friend of Mrs Fenn friend said, the Ocean Staff had called
out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a, so Gerry's "it felt like dining in your garden " was rubbish.
That may be the reason why Mrs Fenns friend (forgot her name) said 'I'm not surprised' when Mrs Fenn called her the evening of the crying incident. I never understood that reaction.
Morning Christine...yes, quite a coincidence that I should be sitting next to her on a coach travelling to Gatwick. This Lady also said the Portugese believed Madeleine was dead and her body thown from nearby cliffs into the sae, weighted down.Well, did you see what we saw?

We’re before a firsthand report.

No, not hearsay. This is, very much like with Sidmouth, the person who was indeed there is now speaking directly to you. Panda is telling you what she heard directly from Edna Glyn’s mouth.

She says that, by coincidence, she flew next to Edna Glyn. Coincidences are one thing that our blog agrees with Kate McCann, but, hey, who are we to deny this one happened?

It’s apparent then that Edna Glyn confirms, to Panda, a total stranger, that she’s the person that Mrs Fenn called on the night this elderly lady supposedly heard a child cry.

What is not apparent, but apparently real is that Panda heard indeed Edna say:

“The Ocean Staff had called out the McCanns from the Tapas Bar more than once because of children crying in 5a, so Gerry's "it felt like dining in your garden " was rubbish.”

And the following:

“The Portuguese believed Madeleine was dead and her body thrown from nearby cliffs into the sea, weighted down”.

There you have it, in black and white. Directly from Panda’s hand, from Edna Glyn’s mouth.

And talking about these two colours, do you still have your crayon with you?

You see, you’re before two White Hats, aren't we? Mine's, and Panda’s.

One of them can’t be White, can it?

You see, I clearly state that Mrs Fenn is a liar, and that is clearly on the opposing side of what Panda states, in the first person, that she’s met and spoke to a person that confirms all Mrs Fenn has said, and says more, a lot more, all reiterating what Mrs Fenn had said she said.
So either, I’m the one lying by consciously and intentionally falsely accusing Mrs Fenn of having heard nothing she said she did hear, or it’s Panda that is lying by saying that she heard, in first hand, I repeat and highlight, a person confirming all that Mrs Fenn said.

It all comes down to this:

- if you believe in Mrs Fenn, colour my hat,
- if you don’t believe in Mrs Fenn, colour Panda’s.

That simple. The choice is yours. Only yours.

I know I’m at a disadvantage. After all, Panda has heard it all directly from the source, whilst I have come up with my opinion based solely on deduction from fact. But I’ll take my chances.

No, dark grey is not black. It has to be a real black, pitch black, yes.

Later in the post, Panda still has this to say about what Edna Glyn told her:

“Hi jd16, apparently the OC reception were called by Residents reporting the crying, the lady did not specify how often. We do know from an OC Barman that the Tapas Group stayed drinking at the Bar until 11.45pm one night and he was supposed to finish his shift at 11.30pm.”
Finally, SY, now that the PJ has been officially “suspended” off the case and you’re the ones on “active duty” now, how about calling in Edna Glyn for a talk?

She seems to have a lot of relevant things to say. At least we know someone who says she does.