Now What, After NOTW?

This blog is about Maddie McCann, but as I’ve had the opportunity to say, does NOT exist because of the unfortunate demise of said British 4-year child.

It was, and is, an anonymous exercise of citizenship, to show that one doesn’t have to be a politician to exercise politics, as politics starts right at the spot where your feet are standing at any given point of time.

Politics is nothing else than the exercise by citizens of their citizenship, usually delegated upon those who they elect, amongst THEMSELVES.

Politicians are as much people, as people are politicians. That simple, and don't ever let that power be taken away from you.

We’ve also shown, post after post, that what is known as the Maddie McCann Affair is much, much more than about the set of events of a death that occurred in PdL.

Recent events have proved us right. Yes, it was in that particular quaint little fishing town that, just like a novel, all the events related with Maddie McCann, did spark.

But as we’ve been explaining, what followed, very quickly took such proportions that made that place nothing more than a speck of dust when seen where all has happened since.

And what followed Maddie’s death is what is REALLY RELEVANT, as that was what was of criminal nature and not the child’s loss of life, which we continue to believe to have happened in an accidental manner.

But, if PdL is indeed but a speck of dust, Portugal itself, its government, police and justice system were not much bigger than a grain of sand, just so you understand how big the conflict of interests really was, and certainly continues to be.

Ironside was the first to use the expression “White Hats”, that, together with its corollary, ”Black Hats”, became a household expressions in this blog. And now are commonly used in the internet.

I found this analogy with the good old cowboys movies, to be one very fortunate choice of words, as both defined with much more accuracy the two main “camps” around the Maddie McCann Affair, than the “Pro” and “Anti” with which we were presented by the Black Hats.

They had two intentions with this.

The first was to link the negativity that the word “Anti” contains with those seeking to know the truth, while attaching themselves to the positive word “Pro”. Much like what is achieved with “White Hats” vs ”Black Hats”, only the other way around, which we, obviously, do find it to be the correct order of things.

The second was that, by dividing us all into either being “Pro-McCann” or “Anti-McCann” they were limiting our opinion scope to just the McCann couple, which was very convenient as it left out the majority of the Black Hats.

Pretty clever, but then again, we’ve always said that we were up against very clever people.

We’ve been saying, for quite a while now, that the Black Hat Castle of Cards, has been steadily crumbling down. And like any erosion, is going at an exponentially fast rate, as we’re witnessing.

Those who were once allies, have now become foes, and foes are known to fight between themselves.

And in the process for an ally to become a foe, it's mandatory for betrayal, or its perception, to be found somewhere in the middle, and how bitter one becomes when one feels betrayed.

We, in this blog have said that the crumbling began with “political demise” of Jim Gamble, but now, when doing some researching for this post, I came across with a somewhat violent articles by The Sun against Gordon Brown, in November 2009.

Getting a name wrong and not bowing in respect of the fallen in combat is unquestionably reprehensible, but I think it doesn’t merit the thrashing the man got on November 9th, 2009 (1)(2)(3).

For example, I found very much more offensive the fact that Jim Gamble, Gerry and Kate McCann wore in public a poppy on their lapels. That really insulted the memory of all valiant soldiers who’ve offered the UK their life as the ultimate sacrifice.

So, something must have happened around that time. Mr. Brown either stepped on someone’s toes or, knowing him as we know, demanded to have more power than he was “entitled” to.

I don’t know what he did, but he certainly had The Sun after him like a rabid dog during and after last year’s elections (1)(2)(3).
 

But that is “way-above-our-pay-grade-level-of-politics”, so we’ll stick with Jim Gamble being kicked off CEOP as the catalyst for the beginning of hostilities between the Black Hats.

Hopefully, history books will correct us on this, but now that is an unimportant detail. What is important is that they’re after each other’s throats, viciously.

So hostilities have now escalated, as we predicted, into a full scale war. The Black Hats are now fighting each other; each belligerent using all its power and might.

The outcome is unknown, but this blog prides itself in contributing that it is indeed taking place.

First, we had the “NOTW 168th Air Squadron” being annihilated right in their HQ. It was wiped completely off the tarmac, unable to get a single plane up in the air. All destroyed on the ground. So humiliating. We’ll back to this later, as it is quite telling about what is going on.

Then we had the “SY Batallions” being torn to shreds in the battlefields of the British Parliament.

The very same battlefields that wait bigger and tougher fights very soon. But the decisive factor that will be remembered in this war was the engaging of the “Brown Division”.  

Gordon Brown did try to tell us something on January 24th, 2011, about his phone being hacked, and, in fact, more than a year before, on Dec 11th 2009, the The Sun had already shown an unusual interest in the use he had of his cellphone.

With the “Brown Division” fully engaged there was no more turning back.

It forced the “Murdoch Corps” to deploy into the battlefield, which is due to arrive soon in full power. Rebekah Brooks' troops have done their best to contain damages, but have caved in. and whatever is to happen, will happen, we only know that it will be barbaric and cannibalistic.

And the events are happening at a rate quite hard to keep up pace with. A huge amount of blood is expected to be spilled, as this huge fighting machine will not go down easy, if it will go down at all, although Rebekah Brooks's resignation appears to show that not all is well on Murdoch's "Eastern Front".

On his "Western Front", it seems that the FBI is now investigating possible hacking on 9/11 relatives of victims. A subject to which all Americans are very sensitive about, so, if this proves to be true, that will mean that the US will be engaged in this war, and we all know what happened when America arrived in all wars in which the UK was already fighting…

They came, they saw and they won.

But let’s return to the ongoing fighting. First, back to the destroying of the “NOTW 168th Air Squadron” and then to the engagement of the “Brown Division”.

And just as a side note, while we’re on the subject of “Divisions”, isn’t it deafening the silence from the “Blair Division”? It’s like it’s exercising fully its Miranda Rights, even before anybody has even read them to them…

The loss of NOTW, is, in the least, scandalous. Why close a paper because it was caught up in some illegality? After all, it wouldn’t be the first, would it? And all others before closed down? Shouldn’t just the responsible ones be the only ones accountable for whatever possible illegality, and allow the paper business to go on as normal, as expected? Why close it?

Shouldn’t the eventual dropping sales be the determining factor for such a decision, and not one based on possible criminal behavior of just a FEW of its professionals?

So many questions, a very simple answer, or at least, a simple word to answer them all: CARELESSNESS.

Only utter CARELESSNESS in handling sensitive information can justify such a hasty decision. This suddenness in closure means only that the whole lot of professionals, archives and computers had to be silenced, and silenced at once.

Why? Because they were CARELESS with the information, and it could be easily accessible by inadequate probing eyes if any action wasn’t taken.

It was preferable to take such obvious action as the deletion of files, which basically assumes guilt, than to have what was deleted be seen. Now, we know that to delete an electronic footprint is not exactly the easiest thing to do…

This CARELESSNESS was probably due to the fact that they felt that they had their backs completely protected, and became ARROGANT. Arrogance only leads down one path, that of error.

So, the NOTW had to go, and it wasn’t enemy fire that wiped off 168 years of tabloid, just like that.

Those who made that decision know very well why they made it, and how urgent and needed it was that it was made.

Enough of the NOTW demise.

Because it isn’t important, what is important is that people understood that British journalists published stories in accordance with the needs and requirements of friends and clients, regardless of being real or not.

Doesn’t the McCann name just pop right up?

The engagement of “Brown Division”, brings in one very important Black Hat asset, The Sun.  

The Sun has been clearly nominated to stand up to the “Brown Division”. The hatred between both is evident, and the tabloid has done a very poor job standing its ground.

I found its defensive tactics quite interesting. As per all Black Hat tactics, it reveals CARELESSNESS and ARROGANCE.

After years of living in a self-created fictionalized world, they decide to react in defense by running a ridiculous story about a parent, who out of the goodness of his heart decided to contact the tabloid to help fight a disease.

How noble, how endearing, but being such a good man, why does he need to be protected from Brown? So that his altruism would go unrecognized by his peers? It can only be that, because any other sort of fear can only result from being afraid of having to be accountable for his words, but that would only worry him if he was lying, and we know he isn’t because he did, so says the tabloid, sign an affidavit.

It’s a known fact that hard times create bonds between sufferers.

Parents of seriously ill children tend to come together and help each other to surpass such difficult times, if only to gather and join up each one’s fading strengths so that together they become a whole strong unity able to fight, together, such adversity.

There’s no back stabbing, only burden-sharing.

If I had a child with a serious disease, and did happen to find out that on nearby bed lay a son or daughter of a celebrity, my natural reaction would be to start to look at that person with much more humanity, and join him/her in all his efforts in the fight against the disease that had stricken both our children.

Not go, behind his back, and tell a tabloid.

But that’s me.

And I‘m not saying that The Sun didn’t have the Brown’s approval to run the story, nor that it did, as I have no idea and am not interested in having one. I’m just saying that the story that the tabloid has run to justify itself is utter tripe.

So much so, that it lasted less than half a day on the internet.

In fact, what we were confronted with, once again, was with yet another “Maddie-Sighting-Witness”, so common in The Sun, only this time the witness didn’t see a lookalike Maddie in some corner of the world, but saw himself heading for The Sun, in the most benign and altruist manner as we saw.

SKY News, as expected, also ran the story, no surprises there, but to watch that news channel these days is quite painful.

One can sense the total discomfort in every word said, be about what subject it may be, because nobody is listening, just watching. Some, like myself, with a smile on their face. But let us just lose one minute to look at what this parent had to say:  
“The father, who contacted us in November 2006, was stunned when he heard the allegations that The Sun must have accessed Fraser's medical files to discover his condition.  
And yesterday he signed a legal affidavit confirming he was the source of our story, published when Mr Brown was Chancellor.  
He said: "It was difficult knowing the truth, then to hear the lies being put out just to screw the papers. 
"This has taken the focus off the issue and it has now put the focus on blaming people for something they didn't do.“

Now, of the two last paragraphs, I’ll just change TWO WORDS for just another TWO WORDS: “the papers” with “Mr. Amaral”. Just see the effect:

“He said: "It was difficult knowing the truth, then to hear the lies being put out just to screw Mr. Amaral.

"This has taken the focus off the issue and it has now put the focus on blaming people for something they didn't do.“

Fascinating, isn’t it? The Sun whining about what The Sun loves to do onto others. It’s like they have this unique template out of which they write their whole newstories.

But what has all this got to do with the McCanns?

The McCann Story was an ARROGANT and CARELESS story ran in the best classical “NI-Style”.

That style being: “we can say whatever we wish, they way we wish to do so and couldn’t give a rat’s ass about your intelligence, so do swallow whole the tripe we dish out to you while we rub it in your face that we can do what we can do, and you just have to put up with it with no complaints whatsoever otherwise we’ll sue your arse right off your pants, are we clear?”

The exact same ARROGANT and CARELESS style that made them close NOTW in a jiffy.

The exact same ARROGANT and CARELESS style that has now made the gigantic “Murdoch Corps” have to fight for its life.

I’ve had the opportunity to remark that although the rats are the first to abandon ship, but to be able to do that, a rope to DRY land is required.

The absence of a rope, or the existence of one that just drops into the middle of the ocean only has one consequence: the rats must stay and fight.

So a rope must then be found, and this is where the McCanns could come in and save save the day.

They’re the ideal sacrificial lambs at this point in time, and they know that, and that’s why they’re so, so silent and quiet. No longer rats, just insignificant white mice in an obscure laboratory.

But are they any good as rope?

On one hand, yes, as the popular wrath would be sufficient to distract the public, although this will only be valid if the US doesn’t pick up on this, if there’s something to be picked up on that side of the Atlantic.

But on anther hand, they’re certainly not. Why? Because of the Fund.

The Fund, unlike lying to the authorities, which is a crime, and unlike any possible sexual scandal which is not a crime at all; it is a SERIOUS crime.

Much, much more SERIOUS than any phone hacking scandal.

What was supposedly a brilliant move to pin down the McCanns and make sure that they had much, much to lose if they one day decided to change their minds about "the truth", has now become a SERIOUS problem to all.

So, apparently, the Black Hats cannot afford to change one scandal for a much bigger one.

As I said, there’s a war going on. I don’t know what the result will be, nor will even venture a prediction.

Only about the McCanns.

If the McCanns are brought to justice by the other hands than those of the Black Hats, then they will not only NOT represent any kind of rope, but become one BIG bucketful of nails for so many coffins out there…

On the other hand, the Black Hats are done with them, and really want to tar and feather them up.

Their situation looks really bad. I’m not seeing the deal that the book was to be an endless source of income, to still be in place. I'm sure it is NOT. And the book didn't really sell that much. Only two months have gone, and it's as if it it didn't exist.

After all, dimwit Kate McCann did decide to bite the hand that was feeding her, didn’t she?

Also, I’m not seeing ANY of the tabloids of running another McCann story EVER again. Too risky. With the exception of their arrest, that is. And about that, can I make a suggestion for The Sun headline that day? How about “McScams”? Do use it please, no copyrights demanded.

Their faces are well too known for them to resort to anonymity, and they don’t have the required “friendships” to live a life of a non-working celebrity.

I would say that they’re between a rock and hard place. They chose on May 3rd, 2007, to have to make that choice today. Now, all they have to do is tell all they know. They’ve asked for it, haven’t they?

And what about us?

Well, we’ll continue to force our hand. Even if the McCanns are brought to justice, it will remain this blog’s responsibility to ensure that there’s no mockery about it.

There are still many things to write. I have to explain to you how you can reopen the process, how Kate McCann’s book is proof that she, or whoever wrote the damn thing, reads this blog, revisit our friend Mr. Smith, and explain what the Gaspar’s statements are all about.

May I is finding some interesting biological and business linkages that help understand this whole drama, and Sina J is busy finding so many missing people that were “plucked” from it, and we still have our ongoing Quiz Night, don’t we?

Also “Up for tennis, Doc?” has had only one chapter, with already other two laying dormant for over a year. Then, we’ll start to join dots, and you fill the colours in.

Lastly, as expected, with the smell of victory I see some people already stepping up on their toes, dusting off and trying out their Sunday suits, swelling up their chests already rehearsing for the upcoming medal ceremony.

Please do not invite us for such an event. We wouldn’t miss our late afternoon tea, with scones, watching our grandchildren playing cricket for anything in this world.

An Image to Retain

A comment from one of our dear Anonymous readers, made on Jul 10, 2011 8:15:00 PM, which we so much thank:

"In the last ever edition of the News of the World the McCanns are not given a single mention, the paper has highlighted all its major headlines e.g. Hungley, Sara Payne, footballers, etc etc and not a single word about the McCanns, there are also allegations that the NOTW published stories which were not true to appease clients and PR companies.  
The silence of the NOTW regarding the McCanns speaks and shouts volumes that this is indeed a cover up, people in high places watch their backs and those of their friends, but in the next few days more revelations will be revealed. Eventually bringing the McCanns to justice.  
Events will move very quickly now, these people will find it impossible to whitewash the McCanns because they themselves are under scrutiny. 
At last this farce is coming to a close, 'everything comes to he who waits' and we have waited four years for justice, it is long overdue.  
Well done Textusa, Ironside, Sina J and May I."

We have been corrected: From Amazon.com:
"MrsD says: There is a mention in today's NOTW, I have a copy. They must have missed it. MrsD says: It comes under the 2007 section, I found it interesting that they report that Kate & Gerry Mccann "report their daughter missing" - rather than Madeleine Mccann was abducted from PDL, might be reading something in to nothing of course"

As Mrs. D says, there’s one very significant distance between “missing” and “abducted/kidnapped”, which isn’t measured in inches, yards or miles. But in units of credibility, which are, as we know, palpable but unmeasurable.

Also, to resume the whole attention given by the NOTW, and similar tripe, to the couple and their humungous propagandistic effort, as an one of the events of a certain year, is indeed quite telling, and is in essence, the same thing as not saying a single word about it.

In our opinion, it doesn’t alter in anything the importance and pertinence of the observation made by our reader, to whom, as we've said, we're very grateful to.

But where correction is due, correction is due, and this blog will always correct itself in its quest for the truth.

Post Scriptum:
It seems an opportune time to suggest that you do reread some of our previous posts:
- Joining the Dots, Colour Filling is Up for Grabs
- National Habits
- National Habits II
- Looking at the Future, Today

Next Attraction

The problem with “little” people who taunt others because they feel completely protected by the big bullies, is that when those bullies do leave, as they always do, life suddenly becomes painful.

It’s like a long term deposit of pain. It returns piled up with interest.

It seems then that one of the McCanns Champions, the NOTW, has been KO’d.

Do you remember when, back in the beginning of February this year, May I "challenged" you to join up some "dots"? No, we didn't then, or now do, own any crystal balls.

We just relied, and rely on plain good old and simple reasoning, known as common sense, or in mathematical terms, logic.

What adds up, adds up, what doesn't, doesn't.

By the way, does anyone know what happened to The Sun's intent of serialising, EXCLUSIVELY, Kate's book ?

Gone too with the wind, perhaps?

 If I were at the McCann Camp, I would seriously start to warm up.

The crowd is anxious, and NOTW fight was too quick and quite disappointing.

They need, and want more, and, if I’m not mistaken, you might just be what the “doctor” ordered: the next attraction.

  Maybe, then:
   

Post Scriptum:
Apologise once again, for my absence. I’ll intermittently be coming here until at least the end of August, when expect to know if the treatment my friend is currently undergoing will make her return back to health, which we all hope and have been fighting for, or if further action will still be required.

It lights up my heart so to feel all your love and warmth, coming here daily. Thank you so, so much!

Textusa will be back very soon

Our sister Textusa has been called away to attend to a relative again. We were all hoping for the person to make a full recovery but she has had a setback recently, so this has slowed her progress.

Please keep reading and posting as Textusa will still be watching over her blog even while she is away.

I’m sure our dedicated readers would like to send Textusa and her sick relative their best wishes.

Sina J

Missing In Action

by May I

In all battles, combatants go missing in action. Sometimes they have been taken prisoner or have been wounded and lost in the confusion of the war.

They may return with important stories, but sometimes they are never heard from again.

What happened to some important witnesses in the battle of which we write?

We still await some news of Father David Heal and his wife Pam.

We are also anxious for news of another couple who have not been heard of since October 2007. Susan and Paul Moyes were the occupants of apartment G5K, which was the apartment directly above Mrs Fenn's; 2 floors above.

They told the press that they arrived in Praia da Luz on the day that Madeleine disappeared. They returned from a “fabulous” night out at 9.15. and sat on their balcony, overlooking the Tapas restaurant.

They saw that the place was full of people eating and drinking. (would that be 15 people, according to Kate, minus Gerry who was carrying out his check and Jane Tanner, who was on her way to or from somewhere?)

The Moyes described the resort as safe and idyllic, a “paradise”, with no mention of recent burglaries or abductions; nor, for that matter, any commotion below that night. Their first inkling about what had happened was a knock on their door at 11.30, that evening, asking them to join in the search for a missing child.

There are no witness statements from them in the released files, despite the fact they would have been crucial witnesses to the events of that evening. Neither is there any mention of them by name in Kate's book.

She does mention an unwelcome visit that evening by a drunken woman, but it can't have been Mrs Moyes, because they say they knew nothing about what had happened until the next day and surely, Pam Heal, the vicar's wife, would not have arrived to console in such a drunken state.

Perhaps the drunken woman should also be listed as missing in action?

The occupant of G5I is listed as Irene McMillan, but according to the cleaner, who normally had this apartment on her list to clean, this was not one of the occupied apartments.

Susan Moyes was interviewed by Radio Stoke in October 2007. She described Madeleine's disappearance as “ a sad, unfortunate ACCIDENT”; a strangely muted choice of adjectives to describe a supposed abduction and an interesting word to use as an alternative to disappearance or abduction.

In the case of the missing in action, it is usual to issue a bulletin to this effect and hope that news of the missing, whatever it may be, will soon be forthcoming.

The Very Last Campaign of the British Empire

This post is dedicated to this blog’s #1 fan, a believer even before it existed.
 

The Battle of Waterloo was fought on Sunday 18 June 1815 near Waterloo in present-day Belgium, then part of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands.

An Imperial French army under the command of Emperor Napoleon was defeated by combined armies of the Seventh Coalition, an Anglo-Allied army under the command of the Duke of Wellington combined with a Prussian army under the command of Gebhard von Blücher.

It was the culminating battle of the Waterloo Campaign and Napoleon's last. The defeat at Waterloo put an end to Napoleon's rule as Emperor of the French and marked the end of his Hundred Days' return from exile.

Why do I bring here the Battle of Waterloo? Because with a few exceptions, it seems to portray the “The Maddie McCann Affair” or as I like to call it privately, “The Very Last Campaign of the British Empire”.

I hope, at the end of this post, you will understand why I call it that.

The Battle of Waterloo had two major belligerents: the French, led by Napoleon, and the “Others”, by the Duke of Wellington.

These, as we’ll see, made up mostly, but not exclusively, of British troops.

The Maddie McCann Affair, also has two major belligerents: the Truth, defended by multinational anonymous citizens, and the “Those Against the Truth”, these, as we’ll see, made up mostly, but not exclusively, of British citizens.

One first major difference about these two sets of events, is that in the IX Century Battle, the French did lose, while I’m certain that the Truth will prevail.

The Truth, in this case, is you.

You, the one trying to understand what really did happen, but that in the process of trying to do so have suffered so many “attacks” coming from so many different directions.

Yet you maintain your determination, and that was something the “attackers” didn’t count on.

Let’s look at the map of the Battle of Waterloo:
 
On the bottom, as said, we have the French flag, and on top, we have two sets of flags, on one side, the Union Jack with the Dutch flag, on the other, the Prussian one.

The United Kingdom, the United Netherlands and Prussia, those countries which flags are depicted, were part of the Seventh Coalition.

But they weren’t the only nations to be present at Waterloo fighting Napoleon. Hanover, Nassau and Brunswick were also there, only their flags aren’t shown:
 
But not all members of the Seventh Coalition were present at Waterloo.

I’ve just named those that were, but during the “Hundred Days War”, these nations were also part of it: Austrian Empire, Russian Empire, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Sardinia, Sicily, Tuscany and Switzerland.

Also, although not a nation, there were present the French Royalists:
 
There were a lot of participants that one hadn’t realized their presence just by looking at the battle maps, or reading history books.

Only three names are basically remembered: Duke of Wellington, Napoleon, and to a lesser degree, Blücher.

One curiosity, completely irrelevant, but we even have a Murat present. In this case a Joachim Murat, brother-in-law of Napoleon Bonaparte. This one died with dignity before a firing squad, after a failed attempt to regain the throne of Naples. It is said he was the one to give the order to fire to the firing squad "Soldats! Faites votre devoir! Droit au cœur mais épargnez le visage. Feu!" (“Soldiers! Do your duty! Straight to the heart but spare the face. Fire!”).

Let’s go back to our Battle Map. Let’s replace the following: The French flag, by “YOU”, the Union Jack by “GUESTS”, United Netherlands flag by “OCEAN CLUB” and the Prussian flag by “TAPAS 9”:
 
I’ll leave to your imagination and common sense with what, or who, you should replace the Hanover, Nassau and Brunswick flags, and where to place them on the Battlefield.

Just realize that although not represented, they’re there, and fighting against you.

And don’t forget the flags of the Austrian Empire, of the Russian Empire, of Sweden, of Spain, of Portugal, of Sardinia, of Sicily, of Tuscany, of Switzerland and of the French Royalists, although they weren’t in the battle itself, they did participate in the campaign.

So we have basically the following: YOU being under attack from TWO main directions.

One coming from the GUESTS/OCEAN CLUB (a coalition-within-the coalition), and the other from the TAPAS 9 side:
 
Or to make things easier to understand graphically:
  This is how the Maddie McCann Affair War raged from 2007 to 2010.

The GUESTS/OCEAN CLUB, once purged of its foot soldiers that were inconvenient to have around, proved to be a united, cohesive and mighty force, which has, like at Waterloo, has been the Black Hat driving force.

The TAPAS 9, has suffered some setbacks, namely the abandonment of O’Brien, the “desertion” of Oldfield and the public humiliation of Tanner in the Mockumentary.

However, its nucleus, the Paynes and the McCanns, has remained intact, and they have, indeed, been highly reinforced, at least by the McCann clan of friends and family, which are those that we know of.

The Paynes like (or need) to be as discreet as possible, so what kind of help they’ve been able to arrange is unknown, but I’m sure existent.

By joining the strengths of these two camps, you can see that you were (are) before a mighty opponent, almost comparable with the Invincible Armada.

You also can now understand why we’ve had so many Black Hats in blogs and forums.

These people have resources to pay professionals, as well as are themselves personally involved to have to commit themselves as if their lives depended on it. In some cases, it does.

People that, at first, you took for gullible, naïve, as well as short-sighted. They stubbornly refused to accept the most obvious of facts, and yet accepted the most bizarre of coincidences for justification.

Then they started not to look that much innocent.

They kept on demanding from you proof of each word you said, while theirs was valid just because they had said so.

Politely they tired you out. What they said with a huge margin of uncertain and probability was to be taken as fact, while all you said with precision would, according to them, remain ambiguous.

They certainly had an hidden agenda, but you just couldn’t put your finger to it… until now.

When this didn’t work out they started to be rude, insulting, with the intent of disrupting, thus creating a hostile environment to drive away from the subject peaceful, reasonable people who were made to feel uncomfortable and just leave and not return.

They were given the impression that those writing about Maddie McCann were rude nutcases without hope of cure, who got their kicks out of fighting each other.

They used against you every tactic possible of counter-information; they threw at you all possible misinformation, which we here called “clutter”.

These people knew very well what was (and is) at stake, and withdrew from it their objectives, which they’ve fought hard for, with efficiency I must say.

Many of them, I remind you, were (and are) trained professionals.

Also, understanding that there was (is) a “Coalition”, you understand that there were (are) different agendas amongst the Black Hats.

You now understand why some defended only and only certain characters while accusing others; while others insisted on spoon feeding you with the negligence theory, agreeing with you whenever you suggested it, and why others lashed at this blog whenever we spoke of anyone outside the TAPAS 9, like Fenn or Murat, but remained in silence while we “trashed” the McCanns.

Although allies, each one of the parties involved defended it’s own interests with maximum priority.

But here the coincidences stop with Waterloo.

Napoleon lost. You’ve resisted. And we, together, stand our ground to this day, and remain resolute not to give it up.

They know that.

And then Gordon Brown’s Government toppled. With his leaving the stage, the relationship of forces within the “Coalition” changed dramatically.

Someone, somewhere, in a certain high place, understood the embarrassment that the McCann “cause” caused the UK to suffer, needlessly.

And Jim Gamble was strongly advised to leave. Was Jim Gamble, the Black Hats’ Duke of Wellington?

Not by a long shot. He was but, shall we say, the GUESTS/OCEAN CLUB’s liaison Officer with the TAPAS9.

He left, and he wasn’t replaced. This meant that the TAPAS9 not only saw themselves abandoned on the battlefield, and at once understood, quite correctly, that if they didn’t act, they would soon by wiped off the board, so they counter-attacked.

Notice that from this point onwards, all the manoeuvering is done between these two forces.

You, supposedly their common enemy, have been left to watch. Yes, now and then they do shoot a round in your direction, just for appearances' sake that they do remain "united", but, let me tell you that the blood shed, is a lot and is between them.

It’s one fierce and ruthless fight that is happening even as we speak.

You see, Kate’s book was indeed a bombshell in some households. Not in yours, nor mine, but it did catch by surprise many.

As said before, we fully understood why it was written. It was with the exact same purpose as when the tabloids paid the Tapas and Murat: to justify publicly money being given.

The idea was that once the book was on sale, the McCanns would have an “endless” source of income, independent of the selling numbers.

The difference between when the tabloids paid out, and now, is that then the “Coalition” was solid (although Murat didn’t like it very much to have been singled out by his own people…), and now the relationship between “allies” has changed completely.

JK Rowling distancing herself from the book, near its publishing date was a clear sign that not all was as it seemed about the book.

So when everyone expected the book to lash out viciously and directly at Gonçalo Amaral, Kate surprised all, by turning “on the hand that had protected her”.

I think she thought that she was just defending herself, but she completely misjudged, or as you'll see, misfired her words.

She clearly points a finger at the Ocean Club. According to her, they wrote down somewhere that the Tapas left the children alone in the apartments, and then proceeded to place the note in an easily accessible spot (one wonders if the Tapas personnel left the reservation book open on that specific page on purpose) as if pinned a roadside Bulletin Board for all to see.

Then, apparently, got their statements wrong by saying they saw the McCanns where they never were, and then that they whisked away, very, very conveniently, potentially important witnesses.

The path was laid out for the opening of the door by the abductor, to have been done by using one of the OC keys.

Also she’s quite harsh on her opinion about Mrs Fenn. I would even say, unnecessarily so.

Kate implies that she insulted the woman, but then again she does insult, literally, so many people in the book, that staying at the “implying” level must be taken as a compliment to the ex-Pat in question.

We now come to a very interesting phenomenon that we’re witnessing, and that is what I call the “Smith-Sighting-Reversed”. That is what is happening with the Carol Tranmer-Fenn’s (CTF) statement, which, by the way, was brought to your attention by this blog, back during last year’s Thanksgiving.

You see, the Smith Sighting was something desired by the McCanns until the moment they realized that it was Gerry who had been identified, and from then on become an issue that the “Coalition” made all possible efforts to keep away from public eyes.

With the CTF’s statement, the inverse happens. It was (is) highly compromising for the Tapas, as a sighting on the precise afternoon of the “abduction“ has been silenced and totally ignored until now, as it most likely describes Russ leaving the Oldfields’ apartments, when he was supposed to be saving Matt from drowning somewhere out at sea.

But now, in various forums, namely Amazon.com, CFT’s statement is popping up every so often, brought by Black Hats.

These are not ANY Black Hats. These can be, by the content of their comments, easily linked with the TAPAS9 camp.

To confirm this, the CFT sighting does appear in the book in all its glory. So, like a mirror image of the Smith Sighting, that was relevant and suddenly ceased to be, the CFT Sighting wasn’t important, and now suddenly is.

Why? Because it widens the circle of involvement onto others outside the Ocean Club institution.

The more involved, the merrier. Or, in other words, the more to take down with, if one is forced to go down, the better.

The above details are almost irrelevant. What is important is that you understand that the book fires in all directions, but uses only fratricide ammunition.

More commonly known as "friendly-fire". It kills as much as any other, only is that it's your "friends" pulling the trigger.

The fighting is now between themselves. The GUESTS/OCEAN CLUB vs TAPAS9.

And guess who’s the weakest link?

But why do I call the Maddie McCann Affair the “The Very Last Campaign of the British Empire”?

Because it all boils down to the arrogant imperialistic attitude with which the UK handled this whole issue. As if the Algarve was British soil, and Portugal some uncivilized part of the world.

For the UK, whatever happened in PdL was an “internal” issue to be dealt with “internally”.

Only with the outcry for Justice from the world, mainly led by anonymous citizens from both Portugal and the UK, have the British authorities realized that this attitude has not only embarrassed the Country worldwide as it has seriously compromised its interests everywhere.

Any British citizen is ashamed to talk about Maddie McCann in whatever corner of the world.

It’s a subject that is to be avoided at all costs, and if brought up, to be dampened as quickly as possible.

Hopefully, as with Maddie, the UK will finally lose its arrogant imperialistic posture, and this may well, we hope, have been the last we’ve seen of such outdated, incorrect and misplaced attitude.
  By the way, as a last remark, if you look at Kate’s pictures lately, she now seems to be worn out. Like we expected her to look when she lost her daughter. How we expect any human being to look after suffering a terrible loss. Kate, you look today, as if tragedy is either upon you, or to befall very soon.

A Kate's “Oops… I Think I’ve Just Confessed” Moment

There are many, many “Oops… I think I’ve just confessed” moments in Kate McCanns book, “Madeleine”.

This is one of them.

On pages 241 and 242, this is what she says:

“Carlos still looked very concerned. There was a great deal we needed to discuss, he told us. He reiterated that the situation was not good. The PJ had a lot of ‘evidence’ against us, and I was certain to be made an arguida in the morning.
First he cited video footage the police had shot of the reactions of the blood and cadaver dogs in apartment 5A and also around our hire car. I would be shown this on my return to the police station, he said. Presumably repeating what he had been told by the PJ, he explained how samples from both these sites had revealed Madeleine’s blood and one of them indicated a 15 out of 19 match with her DNA.
I was totally perplexed. Although this news, if true, seemed to add weight to the possibility that Madeleine had at the very least been physically harmed, unusually I didn’t dwell too much on the frightening implications. I can only assume this was because what we were being told didn’t make sense. If, as the PJ alleged, Madeleine’s blood was in the boot of our car, which we had not rented until 27 May, how on earth had it got there? Did this mean someone had planted it? I could see no other explanation. The police theory, it seemed, was that we had hidden Madeleine’s body, then moved it later, in the car, and buried it elsewhere.”

See the confession?

No?

Let me clarify: “Did this mean someone had planted it?”

The simple fact that her mind finds possible to generate the idea that someone may have planted Maddie’s DNA in the boot of a car rented many days after her supposed abduction, means one and only one very important thing, and that is she’s telling us all that she knows that Maddie’s body was accessible from which to withdraw samples from and plant them somewhere else.

Let me put it this way.

If I was to tell you that I’d just seen a monkey dressed in a tuxedo smoking a cigar in the boor of your car, which of the following questions would pop immediately into your mind:

- has this woman lost it completely or is she on hard drugs or something?

- who put the monkey there, and who made a tuxedo that size?

Yes, the FIRST is the logical thought because of the impossibility and infeasibility of the whole idea.

But that is not what she seems to be asking, is it?

She goes for the SECOND, which she knows, for certain, to be POSSIBLE and FEASIBLE.

Possible because she knows the why, feasible because she knows the how.

Yes...those words means she was working on the theory, in her own mind, of how to get herself out of this situation, not the practicality of where DNA would have to have come from.

If she knew, as she keeps telling us she knows, that Maddie was ABDUCTED, and that the car had been rented much later, her reaction would have been “There’s a mistake, that’s IMPOSSIBLE!”.

How feasible would it be to plant Maddie’s DNA in ANY PLACE if she was indeed ABDUCTED?

Only by the abductor. She does say, on page 242 “The only conclusion I could draw was that we’ve been framed, though this seemed completely implausible”

Yes, but that would mean that the “ABDUCTOR would have abducted and killed Maddie, kept the body with him/her, took some samples from it, continued to maintain surveillance on the couple, and, ONCE AGAIN, would have to have waited for an opportunity whereupon they would have left their car unattended and unlocked.

Talk about conspiracy theories… because if it wasn't the abductor, who could have been?

Not the PJ, unless she's implying the PJ abducted Maddie...

And if it was the abductor, why such determination and vengefulness?

So, basically, she’s CONFESSING, very LOUDLY and CLEARLY, that she knows that there was a source from which that found DNA had come from: the unabducted Maddie’s body.

The Tapas Duet

Remember our post, the Hymns Singers, where we showed how some Tapas Staff "sang" from the same "hymn sheet"?

Well, today we’re glad to present you with the latest Tapas “musical” sensation, the duet “Sandro and Luisa”.

Sandro, says he’s the resort receptionist, implying that there is but ONE, and only ONE reception in the entire Ocean Club Resort, but Luisa corrects him by stating that she’s the “Garden” receptionist.

We’re supposing that by “Garden” she means the “Tapas” Complex within the OC Resort.

Like the true artists they are, they do go into “studio” to "record" separately, Sandro on May 7th, Luisa the day after.

But are they in harmonious synch!

Almost to the point of perfection. Just read what each has to say, especially how they say it.

Remember, they're not "singing" together.

This is Luisa Coutinho’s statement on May 8th, at 12:00 [1], partly of which you’ve read on a previous post:

“Adds that this family, as all Mark Warner clients had a half-board regimen, ie breakfast and dinner.
For dinner, customers can choose between two restaurants, the "Tapas" and "Millennium", in the first being an “á la carte” service, and in the second "bufett", the customers choose not only because of food but also for reasons of proximity to their accommodation.
However, the deponent refers that the guests tell her that states that restaurant "Tapas" has better quality but that it's difficult to get a booking since it has a few seats reserved for, "Mark Warner" customers, 20 to be concrete.
In this concrete case the rational choice for the family’s dinner would be the "Tapas" as it’s 40 meters from the accommodation, while the "Millennium" is about 200 meters from it.
(…)
The deponent states that, from the the restaurant, it’s possible to see the front part of the apartment, in which includes the living room window.
The deponent doesn’t know the location of the room where the couple's three children slept, however, on being informed that it was situated on the opposite side of the apartment, the deponent states that this room is completely out of sight from someone that is at the "Tapas” restaurant.
Therefore, the most viable solution would be to leave the kids either at the "baby sitter", which is the procedure that is normally adopted by the clients.
About the question of being offered a "Baby Sitting " service, between 19.30 and 23.30, says that she knows of its existence and that it is free.
Questioned, the deponent replied that she doesn’t understand how, being a free service, Madeleine Maccann’s parents didn’t use it.”

 Now this is Sandro Silva’s statement, taken the day before, May 7th at 18:45 [2].

“Adds that this family, as all Mark Warner clients had a half-board regimen, ie breakfast and dinner. For dinner, customers can choose between two restaurants, the "Tapas" and "Millennium", in the first being an “á la carte” service, and in the second "bufett", the customers choose not only because of food but also for reasons of proximity to their accommodation.
However, the deponent refers that the guests tell her that states that restaurant "Tapas" has better quality but that it's difficult to get a booking.
In this concrete case the rational choice for the family’s dinner would be the "Tapas" as it’s 40 meters from the accommodation, while the "Millennium" is about 200 meters from it.
The deponent states that, from the the restaurant, it’s possible to see the front part of the apartment, in which includes the living room window.
The deponent doesn’t know the location of the room where the couple's three children slept, however, on being informed that it was situated on the opposite side of the apartment, the deponent states that this room is completely out of sight from someone that is at the "Tapas” restaurant.
Therefore, the most viable solution would be to leave the kids either at the "baby sitter" or take the children to a small playground, fenced that exists in front of the “Tapas” restaurant where they were easily controlled from where the parents were having dinner.
About the question of being offered a "Baby Sitting " service, between 19.30 and 23.30, says that he knows of its existence and that it is free.
Questioned, the deponent replied that she doesn’t understand how, being a free service, Madeleine Maccann’s parents didn’t use it.”

I’ve highlighted, in both statements, by putting in bold, not what is relevant about what they say, but the differences between them.

Amazing isn’t it? I’d dare say that we’re before twin souls, such is the harmony. So much so that when you read this on Luisa’s statement [3].
“It should be referred that the family in question, came through the "MARK WARNER" company, this company has as a policy to handle all with respect to their customers, meaning that, there is virtually no contact between the customers and the receptions, since the latter deals directly with the Mark Warner company.”

And compare it with this on Sandro’s statement [4]: “With regard to the facts now being investigated, the deponent states that the family of Madeleine Maccann they received as normal, it should be referred that their stay was done through the Mark Warner agency, of which Mr. John Hill is its representative. It should be referred that this company has as a policy to handle all with respect to their customers, meaning that, there is virtually no contact between the customers and the receptions, since the latter deals directly with the Mark Warner company.”

You wouldn’t believe they’re saying the exact same thing, which they are, just because, this time, they use different wording from each other to express what they had to say.

We hope sincerely that you, by now, understand who composed the music, and who was conducting it... tasks not exactly befitting a group of British doctors, recently arrived on the premises.

Notes:

[1] Acrescenta que esta família, tal como todos os clientes Mark Warner dispunham de regime de meia-pensão, ou seja, pequeno almoço e jantar.Para o jantar, os clientes podem optar por dois restaurantes, o “Tapas” e o “Millenium”, sendo no primeiro o serviço é “à la carte”, e no segundo é “bufett”, os clientes escolhem náo só pela comida, mas também por questões de proximidade em relação aos seus alojamentos. No entanto, o ora depoente refere que os hóspedes lhe transmitem que restaurante “Tapas” tem melhor qualidade mas que é difícil arranjar reserva uma vez que tem poucos lugares reservados a clientes “Mark Warner”, mais concretamente 20. Neste caso concreto a escolha racional para jantar da família seria o “Tapas” uma vez que dista 40 metros do alojamento, ao passo que o “Millenium” dista cerca de 200 metros do mesmo (...) O ora depoente afirme que, do restaurante é possível ver a parte da frente do apartamneto onde se inclui a janela da sala. O ora depoente desconhece a localização do quarto onde dormiam os três filhos do casal, no entanto ao ser informado que se situava no lado oposto do apartamento, o depoente afirma que esta divisão sai completamente fora do campo de visão de alguém que se encontre no restaurante “Tapas” Porquanto a solução mais viável seria deixar as crianças ou na “baby sitter”, que é o procedimento que normalmente é adoptado pelos clientes. Quanto à questão de ser disponibilizado um serviço de “Baby Sitting”, entre as 19h30 e as 23h30, afirma que sabe da sua existência e que este é gratuíto. Questionado, o ora depoente respondeu que não entende como, sendo o serviço gratuíto, os pais de Madeleine Maccann não usufruiram dele. (In PJ Files pgs 569-570)

[2] Acrescenta que esta família, tal como todos os clientes “Mark Warner” dispunham de regime de meia-pensão, ou seja, pequeno almoço e jantar.Para o jantar, os clientes podem optar por dois restaurantes, o “Tapas” e o “Millenium”, sendo no primeiro o serviço é “à la carte”, e no segundo é “bufett”, os clientes escolhem náo só pela comida, mas também por questões de proximidade em relação aos seus alojamentos. No entanto, o ora depoente refere que os hóspedes lhe transmitem que restaurante “Tapas” tem melhor qualidade mas que é difícil arranjar reserva uma vez que tem poucos lugares. Neste caso concreto a escolha racional para jantar da família seria o “Tapas” uma vez que dista 40 metros do alojamento, ao passo que o “Millenium” dista cerca de 200 metros do mesmo O ora depoente afirma que, do restaurante, é possível ver a parte da frente do apartamento, onde se inclui a janela da sala. O ora depoente desconhece a localização do quarto onde dormiam os três filhos do casal, no entanto, ao ser informado que este se situava no lado oposto do apartamento, o dpeoente afirna que esta divisão sai completamente fora do campo de visão de alguém que se encontre no restaurante “Tapas”. Porquanto, a solução mais viável seria deixar as crianças ou na “baby sitter” ou levarem as crianças para um pequeno parque infantil, vedado que existe mesmo em frente ao restaurante “Tapas” onde eram facilmente controladas do local onde os pais se encontravam a jantar. Quanto à questão de ser disponibilizado um serviço de “Baby Sitting”, entre as 19h30 e as 23h30, afirma que sabe da sua existência e que este é gratuíto. Questionado, o ora depoente respondeu que não entende como, sendo o serviço gratuíto, os pais de Madeleine Maccann não usufruiram dele. (In PJ Files pgs 420-421)

[3] Importa referir que a família em questão, veio por intermédio da empresa “MARK WARNER”, esta empresa tem como política tratar de tudo em relação aos seus clientes, ou seja, não há praticamente nenhum contacto entre os clientes e as recepções, uma vez que esta última lida directamente com a empresa Mark Warner. (in PJ Files pgs 569-570)

[4] No que concerne aos factos que ora se investigam, o ora depoente afirma que, como normal receberam a família da Madeleine Maccann, importando referir que a sua estadia foi feita por intermádio da agência Mark Warner, da qual é representante o Sr. John Hill. Importa referir que esta empresa tem como politica tratar de tudo em relação aos seus clientes, ou seja, não há praticamente nenhum contacto entre os clientes e a recepção, uma vez que esta última lida drectamene com a empresa Mark Warner. (in PJ Files pg 420)