(June 9th, 2012)
On Saturday, June 2nd, 2012, Correio da Manhã (CM) published a piece of news that I think to be of the greatest importance, if not of an historic one.
On Saturday, June 2nd, 2012, Correio da Manhã (CM) published a piece of news that I think to be of the greatest importance, if not of an historic one.
Unfortunately it went unnoticed by most if not all bloggers.
This was particularly sad to have done so, especially by all those involved in the Maddie Affair. They should’ve picked up the importance immediately because they were the first to witness, or be victims of, the novelty referred in the article.
Let me quote the article:
"Ongoing does virtual war
CM had access to the report from the Setestrelas company
Setestrelas, the private company that has produced several "reputational analysis" reports for Jorge Silva Carvalho, fought, on the Internet, Francisco Balsemao’s Impresa. The CM had access to the Setestrelas’ report that reveals the modus operandi used to fight the enemies and competitors of Nuno Vasconcellos’, chairman of Ongoing.
In this document, that evaluates two news from last year - "Balsemao vetoes Manuela Moura Guedes’ move to SIC" and "Impresa is laying-off by mutual agreement and cutting salaries” – it’s done a "permanent reputation monitoring by a daily evaluation of sites, blogs, forums and social networks " on "the news published on 30.06.2011 and replicas until 04.07.2011"
Regarding the news “Balsemao vetoes Manuela Moura Guedes’ move to SIC", it says in Setestrelas’ report: "This intervention has successfully allowed to put into the background some less positive reviews about the Customer", Ongoing, "as well as influencing other users to follow with the initial message passed, which was aimed to weaken Balsemao’s position, seen as responsible for an injustice, moved only by personal issues. " it’s then added that "this work required a permanent action and in a large-scale, given the enormous volume of comments from other internet users."
In this sense, continues the document, "our intervention was shown to be important, both to divert the attention of users from the RTP’s privatization case, driven by some Internet users, as well as to create a contagious effect in the message to be passed, which happened". It’s explained that it was done "a monitoring of news regarding the Balsemao’s veto to Manuela Moura Guedes’ move to SIC, with the aim of weakening Balsemão’s position, instilling in the regular comment readers, the idea that the owner of SIC had acted out of ill-faith."
And it concludes: "It also detected an opinion article from John Lemes Esteves, in the 'Expresso' - 'Is Manuela Moura Guedes the boss of Passos Coelho?' - In which an active intervention was required, so that our comments stayed on the front page of the news, with the aim of discrediting it”.
That is what you can see online but there are other interesting snippets from the paper edition.
On its front page but not main title:
“Ongoing is doing a virtual war against Balsemão
Nuno Vasconcellos attacks on the net his company’s enemies. PAGS 8 AND 9
Seteestrelas Company was contracted to fight the company’s enemies on social networks, websites and blogs”
And on the inside pages, besides what appears in the online edition, the following “attention callers”:
“PINTO BALSEMAO IS DISASTROUS
In the Setestrelas Report it’s written that in one of its interventions on the Internet it was able to "influence the perception of Internet users towards Pinto Balsemao’s disastrous management in front of the Impresa group"“
“INTERVENTIONS WITH OBJECTIVES
The Setestrelas describes, among the main guidelines of the comments that it introduces in sites, the "contestation of the measures announced by Impresa," by giving "a highlight to the fact that Balsemao’s children work in the group and not been affected" by the cuts done.“
“ABOUT 15 THOUSAND COMMENTS
The private company accounts to Ongoing that in one of its interventions "there were inserted approximately 15,000 comments. This is to avoid some negative comments that could harm the media reputation of the Client." “
“RETAINER SERVICES WITH ONGOING
Setestrelas has a monthly retainer service with Ongoing of 10 thousand euros, the CM found.”
“DELETE COMMENTS
In one of the reports Setesetrelas advances as an objective the elimination of negative comments from "the comments first page" of a site.“
A lot of mumble jumble of Portuguese politics and business personalities.
So let me do at this point in time a brief character check and provide you with a little background information so that you understand the context.
Let’s start with the characters:
Pinto Balsemao [PB] and Nuno Vasconcellos [NV]
PB is the owner of the IMPRESA Group, which owns SIC and the most relevant weekly newspaper published in Portugal O Expresso. I refer only to these two because they’ve been mentioned here in the blog before for the poor service they provided to the community about the Maddie Affair.
NV is the owner of ONGOING.
PB was the best man at NV’s wedding, so it’s apparent that they once were quite close friends.
ONGOING owns 23% of IMPRESA and it seems that NV tried, without success, to reinforce his position within this group.
Probably it was because of this failed attempt that they’ve now become enemies, at least in the public’s eye, but we have no way of knowing ot for sure.
Manuela Moura Guedes [MMG] and José Eduardo Moniz [JEM]
During the Socrates government, on Friday evenings, the TVI’s news was presented by MMG.
On that particular day of the week, Socrates and his government suffered fierce attacks and the program quickly gained momentum and popularity much to the PM’s distress.
MMG was, and is, married to JEM who was then TVI’s Information Director. Many were the rumours that government moved all its influence to silence MMG but wasn’t able to.
In August 2009 JEM leaves TVI to go to work for ONGOING.
Soon after his departure, as expected, MMG’s services were apparently no longer required from the referred TV Station and she stopped appearing.
Silva Carvalho [SC]
Portugal’s Intelligence services are concentrated into one Agency, SIRP.
SIRP is then subdivided into two other agencies, SIS and SIED The first is the equivalent of MI5, the UK's domestic security agency and the latter the equivalent of MI6, the foreign intelligence service.
SC was the director of SIED. He answered only to the PM, Jose Socrates and to Julio Pereira, the head of SIRP.
In December 2010, SC leaves SIED and is employed by ONGOING.
In July 2011, the O Expresso reports that SC handed classified information from SIED to ONGOING. SC denies ever having done such.
Silva Carvalho [SC] and Miguel Relvas [MR]
MR is the Portuguese Government’s most powerful Minister, right after the PM, Passos Coelho. In terms of influence, he’s the equivalent of Gordon Brown when Tony Blair was PM.
Lately it has been reported that MR and SC had two meetings and cell-phone texting exchange, making MR the most recent and the most prominent individuality to become involved in the scandal.
In terms of background, as said when speaking of SC, there’s currently a huge political scandal in Portugal about a possible misuse of SIED’s services when he headed that Intelligence Agency.
It’s known in Portugal as the Escandalo das Secretas, which roughly translates into “Secret Services Scandal” and SC is its pivotal character.
Personally I think this whole thing is but an episode among many others in the fierce war between two media moguls in Portugal, PB and NV. A power struggle saga that now has some time.
Let me clarify that this post is not about these two gentlemen, nor about their businesses, nor even about the way they go about doing it.
I don’t quite understand, nor do I want to, the exact details of this feud but the fight between the two just happened to have brought a new profession out into the light.
This post is about what is referred in CM's news article above and that is the birth of that profession: the disrupter.
Someone whose job is to hover like a vulture over the internet, looking over social networks, websites and blogs so they can, thorough spam-commenting, alter the readers’ opinion and undermine the credibility of both content and authorship.
In the Maddie Affair we’ve all always suspected that there were people being paid by the Black Hats to disrupt the various Maddie Affair sites.
Many blogs, including ourselves, have written about the strangely illogical quantity of “Pros”. Those people that apparently are supportive of the McCanns and who used a mixture, in huge amounts, of stubbornness, absurdity and aggressiveness to put down all those who dare lift a finger against the couple.
Don’t call them Black Hats, because the BH’s have many shapes and forms. The “Pros” are just a slice of the whole BH cake. But it is about the “Pros” that this post is about.
We took them to be mercenaries, hired freelancers with little or no moral values or scruples.
Bur the CM article proves that reality is totally and completely different.
We’re not talking about a heterogenic pack of wild dogs that run after a bone thrown at them regardless of it having come from an ostrich or from a human leg.
Setestrelas is a fully set-up legal commercial company.
It has a mission, clients to satisfy, objectives to achieve, profits to make.
As we can see, it does self-evaluation and provides assessment reports to its clients describing methodologies and results.
I’m not making any sort of connection between Setestrelas and the Maddie Affair as there isn’t apparently one. But we’re saying that some British “Setestrelas” types of company are certainly involved in it.
However, one can’t discard the possibility of Setestrelas itself having been hired by the Black Hats to disrupt in Portugal. It would certainly help to explain the inexplicable “Pro” comments in Portuguese that appear from time to time.
After all it is a business and anyone can hire them.
Whoever came up with the “Pro” term (I’m excluding the blog from this because we particularly disliked the Anti/Pro terminology) was inadvertently correct. They weren’t Pros as in “Pro-McCanns” but they were very well named as the “Professionals” they indeed are.
We, back in 2008, were absolutely right when we called them employees.
We, back in 2008, were absolutely right when we called them employees.
Their work environment is the various social-networks on the internet.
By social-networks we’re including, besides the various profitless blogs and forums, also the online newspapers where popular comments are allowed.
The disrupter targets only wherever the common citizen may provide his/her opinion.
With the advent of the computer, the hacker was born. With the social networking, we have the disrupter.
It would be deeply insulting to hackers to make any sort of analogy between both. One requires brains, creativity and excellence, the other just the ability to write.
We don’t know any professional hacking company, mainly because they would be illegal but we’re not naïve to the point of thinking that the big companies don’t have these people on their payroll.
Who doesn’t envy the intellect and the knowledge of a hacker? Look at all latest TV Series and you see that there’s always “the hacker character”, the one with the brains, who dominates all technology and is able to penetrate any computer and reveal its secrets while explaining it all in a language equivalent to a neurosurgeon speaking about the details of his most recent surgery.
Who envies a disrupter? No one, not even whoever is paying. The clients may be genuinely grateful for the services provided but one only envies one who one wishes one could be, and no one wishes to be a disrupter.
Unless one has a really low self-esteem… and one wishes to be vindictive on society that in one's sick mind one think has wronged one.
But although we can’t make any sort of analogy between a hacker and a disrupter, we can, and should compare them. There are two objects we can use to do that: a gun and a cigarette, two objects that I particularly dislike.
A gun involves a lot of intelligence both in its conception as in its making.
The delicate mechanical engineering involved in assuring the complete compatibility between all its parts so they work in a perfect unity in that split-second process that generates gigantic amounts of energy is simply awesome.
A cigarette basically involves convincing you to do something that you don’t need to ever have done.
Making a gun involves intelligence, to sell a cigarette, deceit.
Both are said to kill, but neither of them do. Both only kill when used. It’s the user that makes either object lethal, and here lies the most significant difference between them.
While one is able to imagine some usefulness for a gun, such as being a deterrent against a threat or for hunting in remote locations (to acquire food not as a sport), there simply isn’t anyway one can imagine a “good” use for a cigarette.
A cigarette once lit causes only harm, to the smoker and to all those around him/her.
Before being a gun user, which he is, a hacker is first of all a gun maker. He masters its secrets, its strengths and its weaknesses and knows how just how and when to exploit them all for his own benefit or profit.
A disrupter is nothing but a gun totting idiot, with a cigarette gripped between the teeth, only seeking havoc.
A hacker invents, introduces and spreads a computer virus, while the disrupter is the virus himself.
The other novelty from this piece of news is the need for such a business to have been created.
The business world reacts and adapts itself very quickly to the random tides of the various new requirements that keep surfacing and demand satisfaction. Where there’s a need, very quickly someone is profiting by satisfying it.
So there was a need felt for the existence of disrupters so that such a business was set up.
Why? I see the need for the creation of this new business for the following two reasons:
Firstly because the internet turned everyone’s PC into a personal limitless library.
Yesterday, yesterday’s paper was literally paper that 24 hours later became literally litter. Today, today’s online paper will, as of today, always just be a mouse click away.
It can be retrieved and shown as quickly and as opportunistically as any other news, which maintains one always updated but mainly it enables the enhancement of contradictions of what was said in the past.
The Maddie Affair has proven this point quite well countless times.
In those days, who would have remembered, today, what was published last Saturday? Today, today’s post is based on what was last Saturday’s news, isn’t it?
Up to now, the “opinion makers” owned the "opinion" and because they owned it, they owned the "truth". That stopped being so from the moment you, the common citizen, were able to intervene in real time.
As they then stopped being able to mould the “truth” unhindered they reacted with the only thing they could do and that was to act on the convictions with which you believe the truth to be, thus the need for a professional disrupter.
Someone paid to make you turn away from your own convictions. If these aren’t yet cemented in, they’ll go about it by simple persuasion, but if these are already deeply set in they’ll resort to the only thing they can which is to bully you away from other readers before you contaminate them.
If they see that you can’t be bullied away then they’ll turn their viciousness on to all others they can to isolate you from them, something Textusa’s readers are well familiarized with.
Each reader a blog loses has double value. He’s one less to be accounted for in the numbers of truth believers in the truth and one more they can say believe in what their “truth” may be.
Secondly, the literacy of the average blog reader is usually higher than average. They’re intelligent people who go out of their way to seek information. That’s the most dangerous sort of citizen for any “truth owner”. One who thinks for him or herself and cannot simply be told what is “correct” to be thought is completely unacceptable and must be "removed" as quickly as possible.
We are a few in numbers, yet we’re obliging the other side to a significant use of resources. If you take into account the ratio in question then their expenses are irrationally unbalanced.
But they aren't. Each penny that is spent is stamped with a reason as these people are cold-bloodedly rational.
They spend what they spend because they fear you and they fear you because they understand your importance.
You are the one that most likely haven't yet understood your own importance. You know what it is? It’s the fact that you’re “the opinion”.
Most people fail to realize this importance they have. They can easily understand that the powerful are “opinion-makers” but overlook that it’s only through them that the “opinion” flows.
A fish can only swim if there’s water, take that away from him and it will flap agonizingly to death.
The more clear and unpolluted the water is the fish able to swim stronger and faster. In this case, pollution is illiteracy. Stupid people are poor messenger bearers. They lack credibility. It’s the literate that are best to spread a message.
But you must abide by the rules; otherwise you have to be curtailed.
So if they can’t silence you by reason, they will tire you out methodically, relentlessly and most of all efficiently.
And if that fails then they will tire out methodically, relentlessly and most of all efficiently all those around you away from you, thus the need for a professional disrupter.
The two reasons seem to be identical. After all they have three common factors: you, the others (as in readers) and the truth.
The difference between them is that in the first instance the objective is to separate you and the others from the truth so that their truth prevails; and in the second, for the exact same reason, they want to separate you from the others and the truth.
The difference between them is that in the first instance the objective is to separate you and the others from the truth so that their truth prevails; and in the second, for the exact same reason, they want to separate you from the others and the truth.
It seems to a little complex but just like with the Maddie Affair is quite easy to understand.
But although we loath the kind, we must recognize that in the Maddie Affair the disrupters have done a brilliant job so far.
One just has to look at how the attention and dedication to the Maddie Affair is waning.
Do you remember the days when thousands came daily to discuss the issue, demanding justice and showing how guilty the McCanns obviously were?
And do you remember how much time you wasted discussing neglect, discussing the sole guilt of the T9, assuming for certain the Tapas dinners? Freemasonry, scientific experimentaition... All the brilliant work of extremely well directed spam-commenting and spam blogging. We discussed and discussed and then discussed some more, and the issue lost novelty, attentions got distracted and people left...
It’s certain that in a fight between me holding a baseball bat and dressed in an armoured suit like Joan of Arc and you barehanded, the likelihood of me winning is great, and the disrupters had, and have, the full support of all possible governmental agencies of two countries including the governments of both, but we all must agree that they did do a pretty good job...
Numbers started to fall because people got tired of the impotence felt by the absolute perversity of justice and the shamelessness of those from which we expected the exact opposite.
Are we before a lost war?
How many times have each of us thought “Enough is enough, I’ve no more patience for the issue...” or “What’s the use? They’ll never be brought to Justice anyway so why continue banging the head against the wall?”
I say we’re very far from defeat.
Firstly because the creation of companies like Setestrelas is the recognition by the establishment of the importance of blogs and other social networks. If they feel there’s a need to defend themselves that’s because they feel that they’re really threatened.
In 2008 we wrote here about the strategic importance of blogs.
In 2008 we wrote here about the strategic importance of blogs.
Secondly, because the Maddie Affair may fall into "a silence" but it won't go away, it will always be there, dormant. Permanently lurking the BHs, never allowing a day's rest on that side of the fence.
And in between them, there will always be that look into each others eyes, a constant reminder of favours done and favours owed. Names have been forever blemished. The names of those who thought they were just providing a "little help" but now find out that what they really agreed to was to be pushed into a blazing fire and no one likes to be burned for no reason. Those looks are each tagging a price on the other. Trust is something that was lost with innocence and with Maddie's life.
Thirdly, about the Maddie Affair in particular, we have for us a surprisingly factor that feeds our hope and give reason to our actions: passion. Yours and ours.
And in between them, there will always be that look into each others eyes, a constant reminder of favours done and favours owed. Names have been forever blemished. The names of those who thought they were just providing a "little help" but now find out that what they really agreed to was to be pushed into a blazing fire and no one likes to be burned for no reason. Those looks are each tagging a price on the other. Trust is something that was lost with innocence and with Maddie's life.
Thirdly, about the Maddie Affair in particular, we have for us a surprisingly factor that feeds our hope and give reason to our actions: passion. Yours and ours.
Our blog is basically made up of long and complex posts. Like this one.
They’re “meaty” and do take some time to assimilate. They’re full of details and linkages with what has been written before and they do mention many, many characters as well reference many documents, all public, mind you.
As the BHs like to say, Textusa´s posts make the eyes bleed and not many are able to get past the first paragraph (see now and understand the technique?)...
Add to that, we’re not exactly predictable of when we post next. The three of us have somewhat busy lives and the blog is but minor part of it. So we write when we write, and publish only after the issue at hand has been filtered by all of us. Besides, as you know, we tend to be a little too crabby sometimes...
It also has very little “publicity”. We're scarce on the use of tag words and very few are those that tweet our blog. I would like to take this opportunity to tell them how much we appreciate them and are grateful for all their effort and faithfulness.
So, on all counts Textusa is, understandably, a "tedious" blog.
Our readership numbers should diminish much like we’ve seen happen with other blogs much less “tedious” about the Maddie Affair.
Yet our readership remains stable in the hundreds daily.
Modesty aside, I would say that Textusa and Joana Morais have proven to be exceptional in this aspect.
This tells us that although the “warfare” that we’ve been fighting is immensely asymmetrical and not in our favour, it is producing results because our “opinion-followers” seem to be steadfastly defending their ground.
And even though Textusa is hardly mentioned outside “these walls”, today, among the various fora discussing this issue there’s a common agreement that there was no neglect and that the T9 dined at Tapas as many times as the rest of us.
And slowly the message spreads because you are as clear and unpolluted as any “water” could ever be.
That’s why we together are able to tie up the hands of a (former) prestigious institution like the SY and show how it is as permeable to “instructions” as any police from any poor third-world country.
About the companies like Setestrelas that we’ve long become accustomed to their "fire", let me just say the following: we can’t control our opponent’s actions, all we can do is to anticipate them and prepare ourselves for them. The better we understand the adversary, the better we can do that. Today we got to know our opponent a little better.
They’re not amateurs, they’re professionals, and thus much well organized than we thought them to be.
Now, we either waste time analyzing each and every comment we receive, or we continue to concentrate on what matters and go on writing.
I think you know what our option will always be.
We still have so much to write about. All of which is out there, right before your eyes.
Post read and fully digested. Eyesight intact and no bleeding!
ReplyDeletePerhaps the disrupters will now understand that there is no point in coming to Textusa, and their resources would be better directed elsewhere if they want to influence opinion. Readers on this blog demand a much higher quality of reading matter, and we are confident of getting it here. Thank you as ever to the Sisters.
ReplyDeleteBom dia para todos.
ReplyDeleteAcabei de ver o novo post mas não o li ainda.
Talvez eu possa acrescentar, a título de um pequeno pormenor , que ouvi um comentador na TV afirmar que recebe sms de forças policias com ameaças.
Diz que está a tratar do caso mas que não pode queixar-se no nosso País pois não consegue ter confiança já que muitos estão ligados com os mesmos propósitos.
Lembro também a entrevista de XX/XX numa TV onde XX afirma também que polícias perseguem e processam outros polícias. HC diz a mesma coisa.
Ambos concordam que ha pessoas que por acaso são funcionários das forças policiais mas que actuam a título pessoal.
Portanto temos uma pirâmide com estatutos socio-económicos.
Aqui, estou a referir-me às bases da pirâmide.
O post vai mais longe e, ainda bem
Good morning to everyone.
I just saw the new post but not read it yet.
Maybe I can add by way of a small detail, I heard a commentator on TV said that he receive sms from police forces with threats.
He says he is handling the case but can not complain in our country because can not have confidence because they are connected with the same purposes.
I also remember the interview with XX / XX where XX also claims that police men are on chase and process other officers.
HC says the same thing. Both agree that there are people who happen to be employees of the police force but acting on a personal basis.
So we have a pyramid with socio-economic status. Here I am referring to the base of the pyramid. The post goes further and, thankfully. i have just saw some words and images. Here , post, we see the pyramid top .
Super post ! Esclarecedoramente minucioso.
ReplyDeleteMas não posso sentir-me "diminuída" por escrever em português. Bem sei que não é por aí no meu caso, embora talvez até já tenha acontecido .Upsssss. Sei lá.
Obrigada.
There is a unit in the UK- RICU- Research Information and Communications unit, set up in June 2007, by the government. Volunteers work on internet blogs and forums to manipulate opinion.
ReplyDeleteThe now defunct Sargeants Inn, Who's Outside the Box covered its activities.
http://thumbs.sapo.pt/?pic=http%3A%2F%2Fimgs.sapo.pt%2Fpaperleap_capas%2F2012%2F06%2F09%2F0150_sabado_4103.png&W=373&Q=85
ReplyDeleteAnon 2:10, wasn't Clarence Mitchell part of that unit?
ReplyDeleteMitchell was part of the government Media Monitoring Unit, which looked at such areas as blogs and comments, to assess what opinions were. What they did with that information and how they attempted to use it is another matter.
ReplyDeleteTo my knowledge, they never admitted to paying people to manipulate opinion, but others may have more information on this point.
The reason Text and JM are different is because you both don't allow disrupters to play their game. I come here to read the truth uncluttered. Others blogs and forums are slowly coming to your conclusions. Keep on!
ReplyDeleteBrilliant piece Textusa,(again)hopefully at the Leverson Inquiry next week,Gordon Brown will admit to "helping"the MaCaans from day one,and why???and who thought it necessary for Mitchell to be their "spokes-person". Should be riviting viewing,lots of squirming, I hope, especially David Cameron,in the "hot seat" LOL! In times of such austerity for the rest of us,how will he justify the millions being used,at the request of his "friend" Rebecca,to carry out a review?because thats what her money making machine the Macaans,wanted .Of course I,m hoping,some of the questions needing answers will get asked,and maybe we,ll even find out why the MaCaans phones were apparently never hacked,which IMO beggers belief.You never know,someone just might be ready to "drop someone right in it" lol.
ReplyDeleteMy purpose in life is to slay dragons.
ReplyDeleteDragons of lies, deception and the scandal of not honouring a child but smearing her memory in pounds and pennies.
Here to the end in this clear water of clarity and vigilance.
Do you have to have twitter account to tweet? Something I have avoided up till now.
Su,
ReplyDeleteCould you give me your e-mail through a DO NOT PUBLISH comment?
To Su http://www.blogger.com/profile/01229359526524987174
ReplyDeleteYou can create an account with a mail ; a name and a password Don´t be afraid.
Su http://www.blogger.com/profile/01229359526524987174
ReplyDeleteNo long time to create because Your´s mail is above; so You can creta an account
After You will see.
A teia que junta sempre os mesmos ingredientes:
ReplyDelete- politicos de todos os quadrantes( porque fora das lides deixam de ser adversarios, Sao amigos metidos nas mesmas negociatas).
-escritorios de advogados que como moscas, proliferam dentro do parlamento e cheiram toda a porcaria que vegeta por la. Assim os vemos a defender figurantes que aparentemente jogam em campos politicos opostos. Por maior que seja a etica e melhor que seja a conduta, deve ser dificil conhecer segredos cruciais e nao os usar para intimidar e manipular a belo prazer.
-Editores de jornais e TVs que usam ou sao usados para gerir as conveniencias de politicos e advogados, gerando tempestades ou amainando a mare.
- Agora tambem policias. Nao aqueles que batem corpo a corpo, as ruas para nos defenderem, mas os outros.... Os que promiscuamente vivem de maos dadas com politicos, empresarios e editores e " bufam" novidades ao sabor dos interesses, os seus e os de outros.
E POR ISSO QUE EU ACHO QUE O CASO MADDIE TAMBEM TERA PASSADO PELAS SECRETAS. Gerry que nunca mexeu o rabiosque para procurar a filha a 10 milhas da PDL, nao resistiu a vir a Lisboa para se encontrar com dirigentes do PSD Quando este era oposicao. Nao foi por certo para dizer o quanto se maravilhava com MFL. GA foi afastado das autarquicas de seguida.
Na TVI tambem se afastou a voz incomoda de MMG e magia das magias, a Ongoing ofereceu um emprego ao marido e ela calou-se de vez.
The time we wasted discussing Clarrie...
ReplyDeleteTextusa,
ReplyDeleteIn your brilliant article you forgot to mention what has been the biggest HOAX of all: paedophilia. YM, the Gaspars and relating the number of some sort of process that was given to Gerry was what captivated most all of us. They made us think that Maddie had been victim of that sort of horrible crime but within the Tapas group. That was the biggest disinformation of all!
I think was discussed her many time ago anon Jun 10, 2012 6:53:00 PM
ReplyDeletejealousy and be replaced by the new couple? More from her? Not coming to PdL?
ReplyDeleteSe o caso Maddie fosse pedofilia, Gerry nunca teria colado pedofilos ao desaparecimento da filha. O facto de serem eles os unicos a terem alvitrado a pedofilia e a prova irrefutavel de que a filha desapareceu por outra via. Basta vermos como fogem ao tema " Smiths sight".
ReplyDeleteSempre que o assunto ronda a verdade, fogem e evitam tocar nele. Desespero de quem sabe que foi apanhado mas tenta gerir o folego que o mantem vivo.
There is a championship parallel to the Euro: the clairvoyants championship on Maddie affair.
ReplyDeleteDerek Acorah was visited by a spirit who told him the girl is dead. Grandfather John Warne is convinced that the schoolgirl was snatched on behalf of an American, and that she is now living in Minnesota and attending college.
A joke, if the dead of a girl was not a so serious condition that cannot be reversed.
In the middle of the game, in which wing plays British cop Ian Horrocks? Was she taken to please an American or a Brazilian couple? Did she live in Minnesota or Brazil? Under which condition is she attending the college, boy or girl?
I can imagine how big is the spirits fight, above the heads of all that inspired opportunists.
I have long worried about these "disrupters" and knew that they would appear. When Gerry decided to have a Global Agenda I imagined this scenario - it's the only way they can deal with the fast free thinking on the Web. for them it is a question of "time". They hope eventually to bring us all to heel from exhaustion.
ReplyDeleteAs regards Brown and the Leveson Inquiry - forget it - he won't deliver himself up as a sacrifice no way! It will go the same way as the rest of the witnesses - a show.
It's like two chess players trying to play a game with someone keeping turning the board over. Unfortunately for the disrupter chess players have excellent memories and place all the pieces in their rightful place very quickly.
ReplyDeleteOpened a twitter account and now feel a right tweet. Where is the twitter this sign on this page?
ReplyDeleteWrote this in to the Guardian today under the Levenson enquiry. Might take a few minutes to be deleted.
desmondsusu
11 June 2012 12:57PM
Was Gordon Brown asked why he personally called Socrates and asked if the leading poiliceman on the Madeleine McCann had been dismissed.
The assesment of the PJ's under G Amaral were that the child died in the apartment and the parents concealed the body.
The files are online for anyone and everyone to read.
The British Press thanks to the parents spokesman (clarence mitchell ) turned a well orchestrated xenophobic attack against this brilliant team..
So what I would like Robert Jay to ask is "Why did the British government give one of their people to be the spokesperson for a missing child when the parents were suspects in her disappearance.
And secondly why was Madeleine McCann made a ward of the courts.
Come on let us ask some real questions here. This is a cover up of the highest degree and anyone who opposes the stories and lies lands up facing libel.
These parents spend more money at Carter Ruck then they do actually searching for their child.
Su: the twitter sign don´t exist here on this page nor the share application . Is a choice probably . It is an application that might want or not want to join to the design blog.
ReplyDeleteI do like that:
i copy some sentence and also copy the link and, after i twitt . Pieces from Your choice and the link.
Today DN in Portugal has an article about G. Brown been in Russian for a conference. The extraordinary was the amount he earned for few hours, thousands of Pounds. One can say, was a good business, a good and honest contract. If so, why he needs to give that EXTRAORDINARY EXCUSE ABOUT WHERE THE MONEY GOES? " the money is not going to his personal account, is going to a charity Fund that belongs to him and his wife Sarah" .
ReplyDeleteWe can see, why was so easy for the Mccann's to set a Fund and why the Fund keep going without any investigation. It is an endemic strategy to move money without paying taxes and without explaining his origin or destiny. A shame, because any time We need to do a bank transfer, we pay for it. All to feed the impunity of all this opportunists.
Any idea about who Gordon Brown charity Fund is supporting?
He! He! Cameron gave a gift to Gerry last Sunday. Nacy, his daughter ( 8 years old) was left in a pub by her parents, after a dinner/ lunch with some friends and after some beers. Lucky that the "Egg pimple man" did not make his way to the pub.
ReplyDeleteI can imagine how many times this episode is going to be used in the future by the pair from Rotheley. After all, the father make it clear- is a " British attitude."
Or, Mr. cameron can take his own conclusions about an abductor that snatch a girl from a hotel room and cover his face in shame for all the money he allocate to a fake review.
An excellent article Textusa, I have often wondered about these posters that attempt to change opinions on the Maddie blogs. There are some that come across as being not at all genuine, they do not accept other opinions and when facts are presented to them can become abusive and argumentative as they know they are wrong.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Mccanns came back to UK after fleeing Portugal I recall a PR firm was employed to change public opinion in favour of the Mccanns, obviously this type of PR company simply see’s £ and has no scruples as to finding the truth concerning Madeleine.
I do however feel that events are moving quickly now, Murdoch was once a staunch Mccann supporter, they sold newspapers for him and he ensured he printed what was wanted by team Mccann but now Murdoch’s reputation lies in tatters he has been ridiculed, lost out on the lucrative BSkyB deal that was practically his, he and his son have been shown for the liars they are. The freedom of speech given us by the internet ensures that we can continue seeking justice for Madeleine, eventually I believe we will find the truth.
Perhaps this case will bring down corrupt individuals, close companies that operate outside the rules of common decency by denying justice these things take time. When Gerry and Kate were made suspects Kate states in her book Gerry said ‘we are ruined’ why would he say that if he was innocent, it’s the little things that catch people out. The Mccanns have become a small part of what has become a corrupt political media circus but one by one they are all falling and facing justice and ultimately so will Kate and Gerry. They cannot silence the internet, they cannot change our opinion and they cannot influence us into believing they were ever innocent no matter how much money they throw at PR companies.
Well done Tex and sisters.
Anon Jun 11, 2012 7:09:00 PM,
ReplyDeleteWithout any sort disrespect for any other beloved reader that here comments, I have to say that when we get comments like yours it makes it all worthwhile.
Maybe we should think about writing a post to recognise all the supporters who point out little gems like your Gerry saying ‘we are 'ruined’.
It would be a way of resurrecting some facts that have been downplayed by disrupters.
Textusa,
ReplyDeleteA good post will be as well, one with a compilation of all sentences/ words delivered by Gerry and Kate, as comments or small details. In fact, inside the all context, they are more relevant then what they delivered with purpose of fooling the public and the investigation.
At the end, none of this sentences fit an innocent.
Trawling through my archives in response to this post, I found the following hard copy.
ReplyDeleteIt appeared in Express online comments in October 2007 and the poster was Alias.
This is an extract of the relevant paragraph.
" Julia Hobsbawm was a partner in Hobsbawm McCauley Communications with Sarah McCauley, now known as Sarah Brown, the wife of the British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Julia Hobsbawm is now the founder and chief executive of media analysis and networking company Editorial Intelligence.
And this is where it gets really interesting.
Julia Hobsbawm's new company Editorial Intelligence specialises in analysing and exploiting comment and opinion, in both print and online media. In simple terms, EI helps realise the potential of controlling the shape and fabric of public opinion and debate by controlling what is published in comment areas, forum areas, letters pages and message boards. They have even coined a new word for the online/published British public; they call it the Commenteriat, (a play upon the word Proletariat, originally coined to describe the lower or working classes).
Julia hobsbawm's EI describes itself on its website:
" EI opens a door to a vital and growing world of print and online comment and opinion. What the "Commentariat" says and affects and influences the direction of public opinion and policy alike and with it, corporate reputation.."
How do they "control" what is published in comment and forum areas, letters pages and message boards?
Jun 11, 10:25,
ReplyDeleteBy threatening and intimidating who cause more disturbance.
The comments are made openly and publicly in forums, blogs or papers where this is allowed and normally all that sites make the issue very clear that the comment is a point of view of his author, then the author is 100% responsible for his words. In democracy, we all have the right to our opinion, no matter how controversial it is or how shocking could be to somebody, if done with intelligence and without insults or intimidations. That is what people like some politicians and the Mccann's seem to not respect or accept.
We make our comments honestly and at open eyes, but they intimidate the owners of the blogs or the posters in private by sending letters or emails like the famous letters sent by Carter-ruck to TB ( and looks like to Joana Morais and Mccannfiles as well). They try to scare people using their power or their money( which in Mccann's case was not their money because the money from the Fund was not earned honestly or trough their work). On that issue, the freedom of Amaral book stamped by a Portuguese court, was a huge step for all of us in the right direction- we have the right to question Mccann's version because in 5 years and thousands articles posted by them in the media, plus many interviews, they are not convincent....they fail to provide a single small evidence to bake their theory. We, trough our taxes, payed their delirium with our polices around the world, checking and investigating fake sights of a girl they know died before they raised the alarm. Their behavior and their absence of sense, legitimate all our comments and doubts, no matter how nasty they are ( if they were not insultuous).
Only insultuous or threaten posts should not be published, because this type of comments add nothing to the cause and reduce the credibility of the site and the credibility of who post them. On that parameter, the blogs and Foruns where the Mccann's version are questioned have done a wonderful " publish" work. The owners separate the rubbish from the valuable and encourage posters to behave.
The Mccann's conveniently, mistake nasty and " words questioning them" with insults and threats to try to legitimate their intimidation and their threats. It works, until some of their actions reach a court with independent and brainily judges. They lost with Amaral. I hope they will lost with TB.
They have to keep on their mind that we are only responding to an invitation made by Gerry in 2007: "We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing (...)" I add THAT THE CASE STILL NOT SOLVED, THE WORLD STILL NOT KNOWING WHERE IS MADELEINE AND WHAT HAPPENED TO HER".
It is about you, Mccann's to stop all our comments.... STOP THE LIES,Just TELL US THE TRUTH.
Murdoch showing that his empire has the Brithish politicians tied by the neck. The messenger is the (in) famous tabloid 'The Sun'. They publish the story of G Brown son suffering from cystic fybrosis and now Cameron leaving his daughter in a Pub. All, very important news for Britains. All that private issues of the PMs will affect the life of the British citizens? Only a poor paper dedicated to poor news and a particular agenda could waste trees in such apparent rubbish. The news on themselves, are rubbish, are " no news", but I believe they work perfectly for what Murdoch had in his mind- controlling this politicians and show them that he can destroy them in few lines. And Cameron, like Brown, had to comevforward and corroborate the news, instead of launching a legal threat against The Sun. The result, is that today the face of little Nancy Cameron is on the front page of many papers across the world putting her in danger due tobthe condition of being the daughter of the British PM.
ReplyDeleteMurdoch and the Sun, who cares a lot about the feelings of two shameful parents, the Mccann's, did not care about the safe of Nancy Cameron. They just show again, what we know for long time in Madeleine case- the children are explored by them to sale papers, without fears or respect. Who buy that kind of papers should cover his/her face in shame. The paper is a waste, even inside the toilet.
Why Cameron and Brown bend their knees to that rubbish people, is shocking.
Brown, very weakly, tried to fight Murdoch at Lev Enq by saying that he lied when he accused him of " threatening". He said, to do that, Murdoch must be in a state of unstable mind". Weak, very weak.... Tell the truth about the business involving Murdoch and the Mccann's. How they both explore the drama of a little girl who lost all her basic rights. Why, not open this lign of enquiry? Because you are not clean on that as well. Is the only conclusion we can retrieve from all that scandal.
BTW, is James Murdoch the godfather of Nancy Cameron? If so, what a godfather.
ReplyDeleteWhenever there is a news article concerning the Mccanns and bloggers can comment, these articles will say 'comments are no longer accepted'. The news articles know there is a backlash from the public. People have had enough of the Mccanns, everything about them is fake.
ReplyDeleteThe fake searches, fake fund, fake emotions we all see through that. The few supporters they once had have drifted away bored of the Mccanns and their constant asking for money.
They attempt to create the impression through their PR company's that the public still supports them, but they know it is very different now, the public are sick of the Mccanns. Even those that have not followed this case question why they were not prosecuted for leaving three children alone night after night.Those that follow this case know there was never any neglect. Neglect = Abductor.
No neglect = No abductor.
The Matthews woman was imprisioned for doing exactly what the Mccanns have done, she did not have the connections they have/had.
How two middle class doctors with the aid of PR companies and Murochs corrupt Sun have evaded justice is the biggest crime of all.
I notice in interviews Kate makes a point of saying most people support them and it's only a few that don't. This just proves to me she expects the paid disrupters to do their work otherwise she is totally out of touch with reality.
ReplyDeleteNo-one in their right mind in the Mcs position could think they were being supported let alone say it unless they were part of a cover up.
Revelador este silencio.
ReplyDeleteSera que a revisao nao esta a correr tao bem como esperavam?
Quem pode, ja tem as ferias programadas e as malas meias feitas, mas ainda nao fomos inundados pelos tradicionais apelos para comprarmos os kits de viagem e enfeitarmos as nossas bagagens com a cara da crianca mais famosa do planeta.
Tambem nao nos presentearam com o tao anunciado epilogo que haveria de preencher os nossos fins de tarde a beira mar, com uma leitura extremamente relaxante.
Ja passaram 24 horas sobre a revelacao ao mundo do resultado da investigacao Australiana ao seu mais mediatico desaparecimento: A bebe e o dingo. E ainda nao houve uma fonte proxima da familia Mccann ou o seu 'spin man' a saltar para a frente do 'The Sun' para tirar partido daquilo que se for verdade, tera sido um dos grandes erros da justica Australiana. Afinal o dingo foi tao eficaz quanto o Egg Man. Ao fim de 32 anos parece que nao lhe encontraram o rasto mas concluiram que por ter atacado outras criancas, tambem tera levado aquela. Aplicou-se a lei das probabilidades e ignorou-se um facto que ha 32 anos encheu as paginas dos jornais: Foram encontradas roupas da bebe,com sangue. Nem uma palavra sobre se estariam rasgadas ou marcadas pelos dentes do dingo( prova que ha 32 anos seria facil de identificar, a existir). Foi isso que levou as suspeitas sobre a mae. Mas Parece que 32 anos depois tambem podemos concluir que os dingos nao so comem bebes como os despem antes de os comerem. E por isso que este fechar do caso, vale o que vale e fica ao criterio de cada um de nos, acreditar se se fez mesmo justica ou se a injustica perdurara para sempre. Pelo meio fica uma bebe que so viveu 9 semanas, um divorcio e as tais roupas que espero preencham todas as noites da medica legista.
De qualquer modo, e bastante interessante a mudanca de comportamento do casal Mccann. Se fosse ha um ano, estariam por todo o lado a colar o dingo aos multiplos personagens com interesse que trouxeram para a saga Maddie. Hoje, querem ir embora dos ecrans e 'gozar' o dinheiro que ainda resta no Fundo. Nem que para certificarem a limpeza do nome precisem dos 32 anos que a Australia levou. Agora querem uma revisao que seja eterna e que o mundo esqueca que um dia existiram e mentiram tanto. Cabe a cada um de nos, ir reavivando a memoria para que um dia haja mesmo justica e nao a fantochada de sempre.
'Internet Trolls to be Hunted down'- Sky News.
ReplyDelete-What is considered abusive?
-Where lies the border between free Expression and abuse?
-Who is going to control or monitorize the Internet?
-Are we going back to the dark time of the 'totalitary governments' where 'disagreeing' was not allowed?
-We can see in Russian... there were elections but the citizens don't believe on the results and tried to demand on the streets a very basic right in democracy- the right to be rulled by who got the majority of the votes and really win the elections. Citizens are being hunted, at home by who don't want democracy to prevail.
With the latest news article, it seems a very unfortunate British thing to booze and leave children behind and it is being laughed off as who hasn't done it before. I can say more, but I rather wouldn't.
ReplyDeleteThe press have been responsible for most of the misinformation that the Mccanns have wanted published. Rebecca Brooks of The Sun said they would print the photograph of the Home Secretary everyday in their newspapers until the Government requested a review into Madeleine’s ‘abduction’ bearing in mind The Sun also published on its front pages the open letter to David Cameron from the Mccanns. The Mccanns have proven to be a gold mine for News International selling newspapers Madeleine has been splashed across its front pages. Kate’s book was serialised only in The Sun, ‘heartbreaking’ photographs of the parents ‘grieving’, going to Church, jogging, taking part in fund runs along with the details of how the public could send donations in support of the parents sold newspapers it didn’t matter if the stories were true or false the main aim was to sell papers with ridiculous photo fits of pimple man and blanket man and countless other ‘non’ stories. Whatever happened to investigative journalism, do these journalists not have any pride in their work?
ReplyDeleteFinancially the Mccanns have come a long way since 2007 when they shared a budget holiday package with a bunch of friends, and their family had to provide monetary support so they could pay their mortgage, since then Gerry has jetted around Europe been photographed standing outside the White House, meeting the Pope, rubbing shoulders with celebrities, standing ovations at conferences, very expensive PR and litigation Companies employed by Mccanns, does he actually work these days, financially how do they manage? It’s been 5 years since Madeleine vanished but the real searching never started. Money spent on litigation and trying to restore their reputations all those rather awkward questions remained unanswered Carter Ruck and Co are not working for free their monthly fees must be astronomical nobody can afford to sustain bills like that indefinitely and of course Gerry’s comment ‘that there is no evidence to prove Madeleine is dead’ ( so keep sending your money to us) but then there is no evidence to prove that she is alive either, in fact when one considers the sniffer dogs findings, the dubious company the Mccanns kept on holiday, their downright arrogance towards the pj why is nothing proper being done about solving this mystery and putting an end to the fraudulent fund and searches once and for all. There should be transparency with this fund after all it’s public money that has afforded the Mccanns this lavish lifestyle.
If news international or indeed the media do have the power to make or break individuals, influence voters then this country has become a frightening place to live. A little pressure put in the right place ensures that criminals can remain free. This has to be wrong. David Cameron wrote to the Mccanns as a ‘family man’, but recently the Cameron’s left their daughter in a pub each parent thought the child was with the other parent. How close is their relationship, did neither parent say goodbye to their partner, have we become nothing more than a country of celebrity worship, smiling for the camera (or news International) for those all important newspaper inches, ensuring good publicity a vote puller and not worrying about family life. David Cameron is definitely not a family man. He could have been a great man and requested a proper investigation and brought this ugly matter to a close, but instead he chose the easy option, the vote pleaser.
Anon.Jun 13, 2012 2:48:00 PM
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately those of us who are not influenced by the media (especially the papers) are seeing what those who run our country (UK) are interested in - their Bank Accounts. For too long the people who work and pay taxes have been under the illusion that we have power because we vote.
Not at all!
Even the Leveson Inquiry although going some way to expose the corruption will do nothing to address this because we are led by propaganda and the majority of people will be led by the nose. When Forums started everyone discussed things and information regarding Madeleine was freely available. Now we see the effect of the "disruptors" exposed. This was bound to happen because we cannot be allowed to see what or who is really in charge of not only the truth but also the government.
The Sun put pressure on Cameron to push for the review from the Home Office. In 2007 there was the media frenzy which the Mccanns encouraged it is possible that the Sun or News International was putting pressure on the government back then for PR support for Kate and Gerry and Clarence who was known to the media gave up his job with the government to work for Mccanns with the blessing of the government in return for favourable political news stories.
ReplyDeleteIt kept Madeleine on the front pages and sold newspapers and the stories printed were only ever about the mysterious abductor nothing discriminating about Kate and Gerry. At that time the Mccanns did have a lot of public support one of my friends purchased the rubber wristband and would become very argumentative if any of us questioned the mccanns innocence, but now she says she was a fool and was taken in by the spin and I can honestly say I do not know of one person who supports the Mccanns or believes their abductor theory.
Public opinion has changed we have all seen through the lies, it can only be a matter of time before those protecting the Mccanns accept the reality of this case.
Kate in her book graphically detailing Madeleine's body parts, Kate knows full well Madeleine will never read that book such references were totally unnecessary. She also made reference to the abductor sedating three children, calling the pj a F***Tosser and discussing her and Gerry's sex life. These are not the writings of a distraught mother but those of someone desperate to sell a book and make even more money.
Rebeca Brooks libertada sob fianca. Quem lhe pagou a fianca? Murdoch ou o Fundo Madeleine?
ReplyDeleteEsta, e uma que os Mccann e Mitchell rezam para que nao abra a boca.
Aconteceu-lhe o mesmo que ao Rei Midas. Tudo quis e tudo perdeu. Prenda do destino que tem destas desfeitas: Andou a proteger os Mccann, engordando a sua conta bancaria e a dos seus protegidos, para que eles escapassem da justica. Acabou ela a ajustar contas com a justica. E a procissao ainda vai no adro... se se abre a caixa do caso Maddie, bem podem os 4 preparar a cadeira para uns bons anos atras das grades.
To me the most damaging statement made by this couple was when Kate said that she started sleeping again after the third day. That the first 3 days were the worst.
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine had a 15 year old son who hanged himself last year. She said as unbelievably, indescribably horrific that first week was, it was the best week.
Because after that it just got worse.
I can't imagine losing one of my 6 children, but I know just from being a mother, that the third day would be much worse than the first few, because the reality sinks in. If she had disappeared then the first few days you hold onto hope
that she went wandering - that someone had her in safe keeping, but as the days wore on the despair and reality would just kill one. Well me anyway.
And what mother, not even a week after her precious child goes missing, changes her jewellery. What mother would not have to be scraped off the ground away from her bodily fluids, let alone look beautiful and well presented.
I am still trusting that truth will out. It might appear that the masons are pulling the strings, but all sectors of power and corruption are being exposed. Slowly, slowly, like a leaking tap the truth will come out.
It has to ..
Not too much hope Su, for the truth to come out. UK is going back in time. Now emails and mobiles will be controlled by law. To control what? The crime or the opinion of who don't agree with who has the power? Let see, but my feeling gos to the second possibility.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, when we lost something, everyday the feeling gets worse. At the beginning we could be in shock but not enough time passed to set the reality. Over the time, the reality brings a pain that takes years to be accepted. Most people don't reach that point and never accept the reality. That's why, there is organizations of people who went the same pain and due to their strongness could help other overpass the worse moments. To amaze us, we never saw the Mccann's getting close to organizations of parents of missing childs, to get support or the report of a psychologist who help them deal with circumstances( only when they assault their events to raise money). And I believe, losing a child without knowing where she is is the most painful and worse scenary, a parent could face. Instead of getting that help and the relief of some pain, Kate went jogging and changed her haircut and wardrobe.And didn't do it in private or slowly. She called the TVs of the world to show it, without for a second think if this could annoy the abductor and put her child in more danger( she knows there was no abductor to annoy and no child to protect). It was all about her and her husband. Marketing to captivate one side of the public, who under shock pray for them and run quickly to transfer some money to their Fund.
I just can compare Filomena Teixeira with Kate. They are the opposite in all levels. Filomena got worse over the time, no matter being a beautiful lady. She is surviving but we can see, she died every day. Kate, gets old and fake with a lot of work on her image to look good. She and her husband had a huge dentist work on their mouths, maybe an expert to choose their wardrobes, like celebrities. They lost the plot. Maddie, was just an object used to marketing their new life-style- living under donations and the incomes of a book which is a so poor writting exercise that has no place on the shelves of 'authors or literature'.
Kate being able to sleep again after three days because they believed the public had fallen for the abductor story. At the church in pdl the pair were photographed laughing because they knew the public had been taken in by them.
ReplyDeleteKate wearing jewelery and make up days after Maddie disappeared again all about image. No genuine mother in those circumstances would be able to consider wearing ear rings and make up. The pair have looked guilty from day 1.Their story gets more ridiculous the more they repeat it.
The Leveson inquiry has proven how the media and polititians work hand in hand how corrupt they all are its about time something was done about the Mccanns their greed and arrogance knows no bounds.
Tex,
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to say I log on everyday, don't always comment, but love reading the comments. Let us all stand together sisters and fight for the justice that is rightfully Madeleine's. xx