It’s Christmas time.
Time for the blog to break. For us to pay full attention to our families and friends.
This year we propose that you look at last year’s Christmas. Your Christmas of 2012.
Not because of anything related to Maddie. Just see what you remember from this time last year.
Not because of anything related to Maddie. Just see what you remember from this time last year.
See what you remember and compare each memory with the importance of what was important to you then.
You will see that it’s the little things that make things memorable and what was important then time has shown it was not.
How many important things then turned out to be not that important after all? Almost all.
Most important, how many important things then turned out to be memorable things? Almost none.
What has this to do with Maddie?
You will see soon.
Try and remember what you remember about what former British Prime-Ministers have left as memorable legacy.
A true legacy is one that immediately pops up in one’s mind. One that doesn't need to be searched.
Please don’t go on the internet, just recollect in your mind what was the legacy of your previous Prime-Ministers. We're assuming you don’t live in a country with a long-term “democratic” leader,
In the case of UK, we’re talking about Edward Heath, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan, Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.
You remember their names but we want you to remember their legacy.
You don’t and that’s the point.
All memorable names but forgettable deeds.
All memorable names but forgettable deeds.
Even controversial and unquestionably historic figures are remembered by only one or two major issues. Margaret Thatcher is remembered mainly by her nickname, hairdo and firm speech and, internationally, by the Malvinas/Falkland crisis and, internally, for her stance with the Miners' strike.
And the rest? It will take you a minute or two to remember what each may have done memorable besides winning the election that got them that position. And Gordon Brown not even that.
And the rest? It will take you a minute or two to remember what each may have done memorable besides winning the election that got them that position. And Gordon Brown not even that.
With time, even those memorable things fade away. Especially the names. Only the really, really memorable things are permanently carved in the collective mind.
We’ll give an example. Everyone knows about the Lindbergh baby. It happened 81 years ago in 1932.
What happened in 1932 besides that? We don't expect you to remember anything.
If we didn’t just tell you it was in 1932, would you have remembered? No, you would remember the case and would put into a very vague “in the 20s or 30s” or even a vaguest “in the beginning of the 20th century.”
Wikipedia says “The kidnapping of Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr., the son of famous aviator Charles Lindbergh and Anne Morrow Lindbergh, was one of the most highly publicized crimes of the 20th century”.
And Wikipedia will one day say “The death of Madeleine Beth McCann, the daughter of the infamous couple Gerry McCann and Kate McCann was one of the most highly publicized crimes of the 21st century”.
And Maddie will be as memorable as the Lindbergh baby although with significant differences.
Maddie reached a higher audience as it became the first global crime in history.
Lindbergh baby had closure (the body was found two months later) and Maddie hasn’t. As we write (yes, we’re writing for future historians) it’s been 6 and a half years since it happened and an official conclusion, realistic or not, has yet to be reached.
In 1932 information wasn’t as easily available and as widespread. This means that all the information pertaining this case has been microscopically analysed by many, so the historian’s work will be to microscopically analyse conclusions about data rather than about data itself.
There was no clear or unclear political involvement in the Lindbergh case. In Maddie’s case it was evident and historians will unquestionably focus on this.
Politicians and “civilians” alike, will forever be registered in this case, forever and ever linked to it.
People like Pamela Fenn, John Lowe, Derek Flack and many others will become historic names.
And because UK's highest level politicians were involved, this case will draw, in the future, much more historic interest that the Lindbergh baby case was ever able to.
Unquestionably, Gordon Brown is forever linked, very negatively, with the Maddie case. It will be his historic legacy.
Out of all the UK Prime-Ministers referred to, Margaret Thatcher (Falklands), Tony Blair (Iraq) and Gordon Brown (Maddie) will be those that will be remembered.
What differentiates David Cameron from all the names referred?
Unlike Edward Heath, Harold Wilson, James Callaghan, Margaret Thatcher, John Major, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, David Cameron still has a word to say about his legacy.
While in office he has but the moment he leaves he doesn’t.
It’s still up to him if he wants his name linked positively or negatively to one of the most highly publicized crimes of the 21st century.
What is not up to him is to decide is whether he will be linked to it as he will be.
It’s Christmas time. It’s been 947 days since the review was opened. That’s over 31 months.
We are 510 days from the next elections. 17 months. Less than year and a half.
That’s the time David Cameron has to make his mark.
Whether to go down in history side-by-side with Gordon Brown or as the Prime-Minister who “solved” Maddie’s case. Or at least as the one who set the way so that Scotland Yard could “solve” it
A merry Christmas to all our readers and their families.
May it be a period of deep and profound reflection, especially in the Cameron household and in all those in which useless resistance is still being offered.
What seems to be, today of enough importance to stop the real and material truth about Maddie from coming out is really of little historic importance and certainly won’t be understood historically.
History only remembers important things.
Um santo e feliz Natal, para Textusa, Sisters, e restante família!
ReplyDeleteEnjoy the well deserved break!
XXXXXX
Merry Christmas to all of you, Textusa & sisters.
ReplyDeleteVery good post.
Thank you.
Just saw this article and perhaps may be of interest:
«'Spy planes could have taken picture of Madeleine's abductor': Military expert makes extraordinary claim that suspect could have been pictured by Nato»
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2524059/Spy-planes-taken-picture-Madeleines-abductor-Military-expert-makes-extraordinary-claim-suspect-pictured-Nato.html#ixzz2nZDzjI6V
Anonymous 15 Dec 2013 18:04:00
ReplyDeleteThe story has evolved and grown legs over the last few years. Firstly it was US spy satellites, now it's Portuguese planes on NATO exercises.
Apparently, as it's Christmas time some seem to confuse spy planes with Santa Claus.
Those who believe in one should believe in the other.
However, spy planes are spy planes, be they Portuguese, American or NATO, and many are there that simply can't afford NOT to believe in spy planes.
Did you know that modern spy planes (best known as drones) are piloted remotely?
6 students lost their lives Saturday night when the group, of 7, was surprised by a wave in Praia do Meco, just South of Lisbon.
ReplyDeleteThat's a tragic event and Christmas will not be celebrated by their families and friends. Our heart goes out to them.
Nothing on the international news. Ordinary people don't seem to count.
Words so true - God bless their families.
DeleteHave a great christmas my friend. I look forward to reading more of your work.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Textusa and you are correct in all you state, sadly our country has become as corrupt as some of the governments of third world countries this has been proven by recent events. I fear Cameron will stay silent he is a gutless puppet controlled by News International. Lessons should have been learnt in the Maddie circus why were two suspects Kate and Gerry allowed such freedom with so many suspicions surrounding them why were the McCanns allowed to manipulate the media with false stories that had no evidence or set up a private fund for themselves and yes all their names will go down in history as the group that put their pleasure before the welfare of a baby girl. These people and those that have protected them are truly the dregs of our society, they are not decent human beings their world is full of lies and deceit and self gratification and that is their legacy to their families for generations to come.
ReplyDeleteThey may never spend time in a conventional prison but they will always be in the prison they created through their greed and selfishness.
Great Christmas Tex - you are brill xxx
ReplyDeletehttp://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/david-elstein/crimewatch-dupers-or-duped
ReplyDeleteCrimewatch: dupers or duped?
David Elstein 4 November 2013
Subjects:
crimewatch
BBC
Madeleine McCann
The October edition of Crimewatch, focussing on the case of Madeleine McCann, featured new photofits of a potential suspect - only, they weren't new. According to the Sunday Times, they had been repressed by the McCanns themselves. The failure of the BBC to report this is extraordinary.
For nearly thirty years, Crimewatch has been a regular part of the schedule of the BBC’s main channel, BBC1. By using video reconstructions of unsolved crimes, and accepting help and advice from the UK’s police forces, it has contributed to the conviction of over one hundred major criminals, including murderers and rapists.
These days, Crimewatch no longer has a monthly slot, but it can still pull in a large audience. The October 14th edition, including a 25-minute report on the mysterious disappearance of 3-year-old Madeleine McCann during a family holiday in Portugal six years ago, attracted over 6.5 million viewers, along with a mass of publicity before and after transmission.
The occasion of the programme was the decision by Scotland Yard to present the main findings of its renewed efforts – involving a 37-strong investigative team – to find the child, prompted by an assurance given by Prime Minister David Cameron to Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate, that the closing of the Portuguese investigation into the case would not be allowed to be the final word.
The programme item was curiously inept. Real footage of the McCann family was constantly intercut with shots of (not very) lookalikes: confusing and distracting at the same time. Towards the end, there was reference to a search for a number of long-haired men who had been seen hanging around the apartment block in the holiday resort: yet the only video the “reconstruction” managed to offer was of several men with close-cropped heads.
Much of the publicity the programme attracted centred on new electronic photofits that featured prominently in the programme. They had been generated in the course of interviews with an Irish family, the Smiths, who had also been on holiday in the Praia da Luz resort where the McCanns and some friends of theirs had gathered in April 2007.
Attentive viewers might have been puzzled as to how the Irish witnesses were able to provide such detailed images, six years after the event. We were not told. The interview with the detective leading the Scotland Yard inquiry did not touch on the subject.
(cont)
(cont)
ReplyDeleteThe next day, October 15th, the Daily Express – part of the newspaper group owned by Richard Desmond which has paid out over half a million pounds to the McCanns in compensation for libellous stories about Madeleine’s disappearance – noted that these photofits were actually five years old, but had never been released publicly.
On October 27th, we learned more. The Sunday Times claimed that the photofits had actually been compiled in 2008 by a team of private investigators hired by the Find Madeleine Fund, which had been set up by the McCanns. The investigation had cost £500,000, and had been led by Henri Exton, a former head of MI5 undercover operations. But the company Exton had worked for, Oakley International, had fallen out with the McCanns.
Ostensibly, the dispute was over money, but the McCanns also imposed a ban on any publicising of the contents of the Exton report. According to the Sunday Times, it had contained criticisms of the evidence provided by the friends of the McCanns, and by the McCanns themselves, even raising the possibility that Madeleine might have died after wandering out of the family’s rented apartment through unsecured doors.
Over the years, the McCanns have issued seven different photofits, including one provided by their friend Jane Tanner, who thought she saw a man carrying a child at about 9.15 on the evening Madeleine disappeared. Exton discounted this sighting, and thought the Smith sighting, at about 10 pm, was the most significant. Yet the McCanns, despite passionately pursuing the quest to find their lost child, chose never to issue the Smith photofit
The Scotland Yard team has now satisfied itself that the Tanner sighting can be excluded, agrees that the 10 pm timeline is the correct one and regards the Smith photofit as the most promising lead: five years after the McCanns themselves suppressed all this information, according to the Sunday Times.
Whatever their reasons for doing so, the McCanns are not accountable to the public, despite Gerry’s regular lectures on how the press in general should behave, and why a Royal Charter version of the Leveson recommendations is needed to keep newspapers honest and straightforward in their reporting.
The story in the Sunday Times also indicated that the Exton report included a section in which the father of the Smith family, Martin Smith, noted that his observation of how Gerry McCann used to carry Madeleine on his shoulder reminded him of the man he saw carrying a child at 10 pm on the night Madeleine disappeared. He does not think the man actually was Gerry, but it is not hard to work out why the leader of the Portuguese inquiry concluded that the McCanns were implicated in the disappearance. The McCanns are suing him for libel, and both the Portuguese police and Scotland Yard are satisfied they had no part in the disappearance, but fear of inciting more press speculation in the UK may explain the decision to suppress the entire Oakley report.
(cont)
(cont)
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to believe that the Crimewatch team was ignorant of this history. It would have been incredibly unprofessional of them not even to ask how and when Scotland Yard had obtained the “new” photofits. The programme referred to the Irish family, and a “fresh” investigation, but the absence of any reference to “new” photofits strongly suggests that Crimewatch knew the background perfectly well.
Does this matter? Crimewatch occupies an uneasy space between entertainment and information. Its brief is undoubtedly one of public service, but it is not in the business of journalism. No journalist would go out of his way to mislead the public in the way this edition of Crimewatch managed to do.
The essence of Crimewatch is complicity: close co-operation with the police and the purported victims of crime, to the point of eliminating anything awkward that might get in the way of that joint endeavour. The Sunday Times quoted a source close to the McCanns as saying that release of the original Oakley investigation might have distracted the public from their objective of finding their child. Yet the bottom line of this story is that the parents deliberately withheld, for five years, the photofits that Scotland Yard now says are the most important evidence in the search for the supposed culprits. For any journalist, that would have been at least as important a fact to reveal to the public as the photofits themselves.
Yet the most important area of journalism in the UK – the BBC, which accounts for over 60% of all news consumption – has remained silent on the revelations in the Sunday Times. Even the BBC website, with over 900 stories related to the disappearance over the years, has not found room for that startling information (though you can find links to the Daily Star’s website, which repeated much of the Sunday Times material on October 28th). It would be dismaying if some kind of misguided loyalty to the non-journalists at Crimewatch was inhibiting the 8,000 BBC staff who work in its news division.
It is, of course, just possible that Crimewatch was itself duped by the McCanns: but I doubt it. Instead, the editor chose to join the McCanns in trying to dupe the public. Neither option shows the BBC in a good light. Whatever the failings over the two Newsnight items – the untransmitted one on Jimmy Savile, the transmitted one that libelled Lord McAlpine – no-one can argue that there was any definite intention to mislead the public. Sadly, the same cannot be said of October’s Crimewatch.
200 comments
Oakley International/ Red Defence were firms headed by Kevin Halligen.
DeleteHe didn't get a mention when Oakley's work was discussed, in relation to the suppressed e-fits. I wonder where he is now?
Merry Christmas sisters, all the best for this New Year from all your Spanish readers
ReplyDeleteThank you so much, Mercedes & Mila
DeleteWe also wish you both and your readers a wonderful Christmas and a very significant 2014.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/25/world/meast/saudi-blogger-death-sentence/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
ReplyDeleteTo all those doubting that serious, responsible blogging is considered a threat to all and any established system.
According to the latest Mccspin ( the portuguese CM included), creche dad came forward in 2007 and the blond girl reported by the Smiths, was ginger.
ReplyDeleteIf was not the tragic faith of a little girl, who probably lost her life before the world had known the story, I would say that SY and the UK media turned the drama in to a comedy.
First question to ask creche dad: whyhe carried his child that way?
Second question: why he headed to the direction pointed out by Jane Taner?
To the Smiths: who said they saw a ginger instead of a blond? I have r
ead nothing pointed to that on their statements,
Karma, because at early January, the Court in Lisbon must take a decision.
Anonymous 29 Dec 2013 02:50:00
ReplyDeleteCould you please direct me to where have you read the Smiths said a ginger instead of a blonde? First time I'm reading this.
Me too, anon 29, 12:53, that's why I made my comment. I read it in the portuguese newspaper Correio da Manhã ( Before yesterday) and the paper was reporting the source as the british papers and Leicester police, highlighting the idea that was Leicester police fault, because they were investigating an innocent dad who came forward in 2007, presenting himself as the man reported by Jane Tanner. I will try to find the link and post it here. But the same news are available on the latest posts at Mccannfiles. This one, from british papers.
ReplyDeleteThey cannot surprise anymore with their strategies. They have been quite until now. What force them to come with that spin again is the closest date of Early January for the Lisbon Court to made the last allegations on Mccann's caseV Amaral, according to my opinion.
Thanks, from anon 29, 2:50
Anon 12:53,
ReplyDeleteHere is the link:
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/policia-seguiu-pista-falsa-durante-seis-anos202919807
And here is the part regarding the Smiths and the Ginger girl:
"A constatação de que poderia tratar-se de uma pista falsa surgiu quando uma família irlandesa, de apelido Smith, afirmou ter visto um homem com uma menina ruiva, cerca das 22h00, a caminhar na praia da Luz. A revelação foi feita por Andy Redwood, oficial que conduz a nova investigação."
Thank you!
DeleteI didn't read anything of the sort in the Brit media, so I don't know where the CdM reporter got the ginger hair from. Trying to say that Smithman is Creche Dad by saying the girl wasn't Maddie?
"Madeleine McCann: Bungling police had 'prime suspect' details for SIX YEARS without realising Daily Mirror"- Available at Mccannfiles
ReplyDeleteNow, Creche dad is the same guy, the Smith family saw carrying a "motionless girl".
What a comedy, mr Redwood, where have been creche dad with his motionless child since Tanner saw him until the Smiths sight? If the child was at the so farway creche, why he did not use a buggy to pick his daughter? That collection of odd people with odd decisions is amazing.
The british authorities get to the point that going around make the lizard bite his own tail.
In the Daily Mail they said SY have dismissed Tanners sighting and agree with the Smith Sighting stating that was the abductor, but this is what Textusa went to great lengths to explain years ago about how Gerry carried another youngster through the busy streets of pdl with the intention of being seen by witnesses. The sighting was deliberate Gerry wanted to be seen. Jane Tanners sighting grew more ridiculous by the day, there is no way it could stay as part of the fairytale far too many flaws. At this rate (and more tax payers money) by next Christmas SY will be stating the big round table and dinners did not exist.
ReplyDeleteThe McCanns are a pair of liars they know exactly what happened to their daughter, they show no emotion or feeling towards Madeleine and never have they are greedy publicity seeking freaks.
Just wanted to say to Textusa and Sisters a really, really big thank you - we read all your posts and so do our friends. When this case is finally solved Textusa will have played her part in bringing justice for Madeleine. Textusa articles and posts are read Internationally and will be here always for us to read and comment upon and her analysing skills are brilliant. Happy New Year Textusa xx
ReplyDeleteWhen did the McCanns offer to donate any of the millions of pounds people gave to them in good faith to other charities of missing persons. The Mccanns have scammed millions from the public and they have used it for litigation cases, teeth whitening and PR what a waste of money. They belong in jail for their numerous crimes and so do the rest of the tapas group for their silence.
ReplyDeleteSun today
ReplyDeleteBill for SY - " tops £6 million"
When has UK EVER spent this on a missing child case? Particularly when common sense dictates she must be dead.
Just think what could have been done with that money. How many redundancies could have been avoided.
And what do we have as a result ? To date, nothing.
Anonymous 1 Jan 2014 12:37:00
DeleteAdd to that figure the money said to be have been spent by the Fund.
Top it with whatever the Portuguese have spent as of May 4th 2007 and you have yourself the single most expensive case in criminal history of all time.
Outside what was spent by the Fund, the remainder was, is, and will be, out of our pockets.
SCOTLAND Yard’s bill for its probe into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance has topped £6million, The Sun can reveal.
DeleteIn the last three months a major public appeal for information has pushed the cost of Operation Grange up by £1.64million — and the total is now likely to rocket to £10million-plus.
A Freedom of Information request showed the bill for Grange — launched in May 2011 — had reached £6,343,116 by November 30.
It includes £88,199.652 on travel, with officers regularly flying to Praia da Luz, the Portuguese resort where Madeleine, then three, vanished in May 2007.
The probe was set up after her parents Kate and Gerry, both 45, of Rothley, Leics, wrote an open letter in The Sun asking the PM for help.
A two-year review identified 200 potential leads and a new investigation — including a Crimewatch reconstruction — prompted 5,000 calls.
Det Chief Insp Andy Redwood, in charge of Grange, said: “All this has produced a large volume of work.”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5351762/Police-bill-for-Madeleine-McCann-probe-tops-6million.html
That’s the price of a cover up!
DeleteWhich is the color of Jane Tanner's child, the one close in age to Madeleine's? I don't think she is a "blonde blonde", as I don't think Madeleine was all that blonde too...more sort of a very light brown, just look at the many pictures of Madeleine, so many shades of hair and even her face looks like many different little girls...
ReplyDeletehttp://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/03/making-of.html
DeleteIts hard to believe that SY and the UK Government are happy to keep throwing money at the McCann case, considering the amount of suspicion and doubt concerning the parents. How many more clips on Youtube or wherever are needed before the police start interviewing the real culpriits Kate and Gerry. We've all seen Gerry sitting smug and smirking or Kate looking uncomfortable whilst the pair continue lying. Their lying has become so obvious that it is embarassing to watch and those in authiority stand back and do nothing except throw more tax payers money at the Mccanns. How anybody can justify spending that amount of money on one single missing person when there is so much contraversy surrounding this case makes the whole money making circus obscene.
ReplyDelete'“@skymartinbrunt: #madeleine Kate and Gerry McCann refused permission to give evidence next week in Lisbon libel trial #McCann'
ReplyDeleteThe above is from the Jill Havern site and it also states the Mccanns lawyer is going to appeal.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/451814/Madeleine-McCann-parents-cannot-give-evidence-at-detective-s-libel-trial-judge-rules
ReplyDeletethe link from Express Papers about trial.
Official papers concerning the miners strike when Margaret Thacher was primeminster have just been released 30 years later expose how MP's lied over the planned closure of pits etc. Old footage shows them lying about closures.
ReplyDeleteAs Madeleine Mccann case has wasted milliions of tax payers money and the government has been involved, with so much duplicity and suspicions surrounding the parents. It is possible that one day official government papers are finally published exposing SY and the government's involvement in this case. The truth will finally be revealed and that will be the legacy that these despicable parents Kate and Gerry and their friends have left for their children. The twins will have to live with the knowledge that whatever happened to Madeleine could have happened to them, they will be made aware of the vast amounts of money that their parents wasted in a vain effort to fool the public into believing they were innocent.
There will be official government papers recorded on this case because it is the biggest scam involving tax payers money which could have been put to much better use.
Anon, my thoughts exactly. As an ex coalminer, I recall those blatent lies all too well. No-one believed us. Govt. spin was far more professional than the NUM's, and our efforts for objective dialogue were largely ridiculed in the press, in pubs and on TV with lazy but effective insults. Exactly as we are witnessing now with this pair of schemers. Same tactics.
DeleteBut how did the old Thatcherites respond to this evidence of Govt. lies? Well, they basically ignored it. There'll be no ignoring this case when it's finally blown apart, and the deceit, if that's what is, finally acknowledged.
O " Daily Mail, investido na missão do costume atribuiu esta semana à SY 3 suspeitos para o caso Maddie. Ah, Ah, um deles português, baseado nas " chamadas telefónicas que fez entre si" ( vá-se lá perceber o sentido desta frase) que pelos vistos foi muito intensa na noite de 3 de Maio.
ReplyDeleteComo a mentira tem perna curta e estes mccurnalistas teimam em ter fraca memória, convém lembrar o público que os lê, que há uns meses, talvez anos, a propósito de chamadas telefónicas para o mesmo caso, se publicou que" as operadoras telefónicas não guardam os dados por mais de 2 anos", tornando impossivel o acesso a eles depois deste periodo. Então onde é que a SY foi buscar o "coelho" que pretende tirar agora da " cartola"? O suspeito português teria por certo um TM português, ou não é própriamente de nacionalidade portuguesa?
Tanta arvore desperdiçada só para tentar manipular um tribunal português que tem todos os dados para ilibar GA e requerer um inquérito a sério aos movimentos/ atitudes dos Mccann e amigos, que incluem a noite de 3 de Maio e o famoso Fundo criado em nome da filha.
"Final note on Law
ReplyDeleteTranslation by Astro
The new Civil Procedure Code introduces a new means of evidence - the declarations by a party - in which the party itself [i.e. the McCanns and/or Gonçalo Amaral], on its own initiative, may request, until the start of oral allegations at first instance [the closing arguments], to make a statement about facts in which the party intervened personally or of which the party has direct knowledge. The party that makes a statement is subject to the duty of cooperation and truth, which means that it must reply to everything that is asked, to submit to any necessary inspections and to provide everything that is requested from the party. The questioning of the party that makes a statement is led by the Judge, and the lawyers may only ask for clarifications. If, in its statements, the party confesses to any fact, that confession is valued in the files and with due effects, which is to say it is irreversible and has full probative force [it is considered evidence]. In the absence of a confession, the statements by the party are freely valued by the Court."
From Mccannfiles
Most probably the Mccann's refused to testify in court due to the fact posted above by Astro, but will be bad for their image to assume that. Instead, their spin machine try to stick the fault on the court or the judge and sell their usual strategy of being the victims.
Voter trust in national institutions is crumbling according to Lord Paddy Ashdown, former Liberal Democrat leader. He fears a series of scandals has contributed to declining faith in politicians, journalists, bankers, the BBC and NHS .
ReplyDeleteHe said "I'm reminded of the terrible line from Larkin: ' England, with a cast of crooks and tarts.' "
For me, add police at highest levels.
SY have a chance to redeem themselves with this case. It remains to be seen if they will do so.
I'm pleased to see my Village of the Damned quote being used on another site, but feel its origins on Textusa should be acknowledged. A person known as Petermac used it, and now readers may assume anon on Textusa is him. As the person who wrote that, can I confirm I am not Petermac. Nothing against this person, just wanting to clarify.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 5 Jan 2014 11:44:00
DeleteAllow us to confirm that you're not said poster. There is no question about that, as you at the time also made unpublished comment clarifying certain facts.
And if you are one of our kind, as we think you are, you won't mind seeing your words quoted elsewhere without acknowledgement as we think it's much more important to spread the message than the messenger.
Textusa,
DeleteI'm very happy for the comment to be used elsewhere, but just wanted to make it clear I'm not Petermac, without being negative in any way about him.
Anon 11:44
just to say I am on havern's and read this post from PeterMac today. I recall having read it earlier on the forum and am sure I saw it credited some weeks ago.
ReplyDeleteI find so much on this blog interesting that I discuss it there and would like to let you know that if I have not credited the blog is simply that I have forgotten. Credit where credit is due ! Looking forward to reading many more interesting discussions here now that the holiday season is at an end and it is a new year. Best wishes to all here and hopefully a well deserved rest was had by the sisters.
I'm trying to get my head around the theory that the TAPAS friends were there in order to be initiated into this particular swinging society. Ive just done a bit of brief internet research on initiation into swinging and it does seem many 'clubs' have an initiation ceremony with associated rituals which must be performed. Very interesting. Does Textusa believe that all of the 4 couples were there to be initiated? Do you think the 8 of them were already in their own swinging society? I guess they must have already been involved to a degree in swinging to have been considered suitable.. JT does not come across as similar to the other 3 females...
ReplyDeleteEdPhillpotts,
DeleteSwinging brings on a very heavy social stigma, so the progression upwards in its "food-chain" is made solely of trust.
If we had to provide our opinion, we would say that the Payne family would seem to be higher on that "food-chain" than the others.
Please do keep us updated on your researches on swinging. It may come useful in our next post.
Thanks Textusa. Another couple who arrived on 28th April for the week were Jez Wilikins and his wife Bridget, who penned a most curious summary of her time in PdL in the Guardian. Now that I'm thinking analytically in terms of the theory of this blog, I am seeing her 'article' in a different light... it seems less absurd and more reasonable now I am thinking it was written with a definite purpose.. will continue my research on how high class swinging clubs function.
Delete