Before Demanding, We Should Provide

“At the dinner [in Lisbon in support of Gonçalo Amaral] Stephen was very well received, many people chatting to him. Grenville had a long chat to Duarte Levy. (…) Joana Morais was unable to attend the dinner as she needed to upload material for her blog about the trial. She told Grenville that keeping up the blog was almost a full-time job and at busy times meant working until the early hours of the morning.” (http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.com/2010/01/grenville-green-mccanns-libel-trial-in.html)

Sorry to be a spoil-sport in such euphoric times of watching the McCann’s sandcastle shiver while it watches the rising tide slowly but surely come in, but I must get this off my chest.

What are we demanding from the McCanns? One word: honesty.

Honesty about what happened that night. With that, consequences will follow, that one must endure as result of one’s actions. It all boils down to having the TRUTH be known.

It’s only logical that in order to demand one must first provide. Set the example. That said I was quite surprised to read the name of an already exposed conman in a post about how Court proceedings were being successful in putting in pressure on the McCanns so as to rip away, once and for all, their evil masks.

How can one criticize Branson, Kennedy or Rawlings (based only on what I've read on who to expect to attend on Jan27th) in attending the forthcoming social event to refinance the Fraudulent Fund (can’t you people understand that the ONLY reason for these events is to provide a “plausible” excuse to inject money into the fund, regardless of who attends them?)?.

They are only being friends to somebody they know is wrong, and has done wrong. Because, as all know, a really true friend is there when you need him the most.

So, all those being friendly with this gentleman, please refrain from ever again criticizing ANY of the McCann friends. If you do, you’re being an hypocrite.

Sorry, I know this isn't what you like or want to read, but this is what I have to say to be coherent with my conscience.

Liars are usually shameless people. Arrogant, egocentric and egomaniacal are devoid of shame. Put all these traits together and you’ll find the same amount of shame as you’ll find life in little Maddie’s cadaver.

I’m still waiting from him the same that I’m basically demanding from the McCanns: a truthful recognition of error, and full assumption of responsibility for deeds done. Instead, I got a lame excuse that it was personal business.

I do believe that this gentleman “forced” his way in, as only a manipulator is able. Saying an outright “no” to this kind of person takes a courage that most people don’t have.

Let me speak directly to you, whoever was responsible to invite the gentleman. I’m led to believe that his presence was a direct result of you being a True Friend of his. Not turning your back on him. But were you? A friend, I mean. I tell my friends that my friendship towards them is not revealed by helping them to run away from responsibility, but in the fact of making them face it, with all its consequence.

And is also shown by my full support to them all the painful way. If they are my friends, they understand that making ME going through the process of harboring their shortfalls, is an attitude that reveals very little friendship from them towards me.

Was this conman being your friend when he blatantly lied about his feats in a process in which you were deeply involved and to which you bravely gave your face? I don’t think so.

And is a “friend” like that worth your friendship? That, Sir, only you can answer. However if you answer is affirmative, please don't ask any of the McCann friends & family to come foward and cooperate with justice.

I also believe that that was the reason for Joana’s absence at that dinner. I’m assuming this as this is what I would have done were I her. I probably wouldn’t have come up with such a polite excuse like she did, but she’s put a whole lot of her into bringing all of this to a successful end, and once again, has shown greatness by understanding that sometimes some things are much more important than oneself.

I would've thrown a tantrum and would have sulked and behaved like a spoiled child. But then she’s lady, and her “lie” (which, I repeat, I’m assuming solely) is acceptable.

To finish, let me state clearly that I think that there were three major things that have been decisive in this arduous process of bringing the McCanns to justice: Gonçalo Amaral, the man and the book; Joana & Astro’s blog (sorry Kazlux, but you came in later) and the 3Arguidos Forum.

Not that many others weren’t and aren’t important. They were and are and I have one time or another named them, and if I haven’t I’ve been unjust, but these, for me, were the DECISIVE ones. So, in honoring Gonçalo Amaral, we had a dinner where a conman was present and Joana wasn’t.

At least now you know my opinion on the subject.

Note: (19Jan, 07:00) Through a comment on Joana's blog, made by herself, she suggests that there is a possibility of me having used the name of Dr. Sargento's abusevely in this post. 

Not wanting to be unjust, I have withdrawn from the post any mentioning of his name. 

It doesn't alter in anyway what I meant to say in it, and as said, originally, 

I have no problem in apologizing if that, I repeat, is the case.

The Importance of the F-Word Slander Stunt

As promised, updated 16Jan, 20:20:  

Quoted from The Mirror (MARTIN FRICKLER), published 14 January 2010: 

“RANTING RAT 

As she suffers unimaginable agony, the police chief who should have been finding missing Maddy spits out vile four-letter abuse at the McCanns..  

Disgraced detective Goncalo Amaral yesterday let rip at Kate and Gerry McCann with a foul-mouthed outburst. The former policeman was asked if his book about their daughter Madeleine was hurting the couple when he barked: "No, f*** the McCanns." 

Amaral then laughed as he walked off, despite being caught on camera insulting a couple who have suffered so much anguish in recent years.” 


Quoted from The Sun (TOM WELLS and ANTONELLA LAZZERI), published 14 January 2010: 

“THE ex-cop who led the Madeleine McCann probe sparked new outrage last night after launching a four-letter tirade against the missing child's parents. Brazen Goncalo Amaral spat, "F*** the McCanns" when asked by a BBC TV reporter if he felt his wild claims about their daughter were hurting them.” 


Quoted from the Daily Star, published on 15th January 2010 

“BBC IN CURSING ‘FOUL-UP’  

BBC bosses sparked a row after accusing Goncalo Amaral of a four-letter tirade against Kate and Gerry McCann. They insisted the ex-detective said: “F*** the McCanns,” when asked by a BBC reporter if he felt his allegations were hurting the couple. 

But last night it was claimed he said: “Fala com McCanns,” which means: “Speak to the McCanns”. Asked if he had sworn, Mr Amaral replied: “Never. I don’t know what you are talking about.” 

Rival TV companies refused to broadcast the footage after their translators studied it. But it was broadcast, with the key word bleeped out, by the BBC in the East Midlands. 

A BBC spokesman said: “The exchange was recorded on camera. The swear word was bleeped out for transmission as it was clearly unacceptable to broadcast such language at 6.30pm.” 


Quoted from Sky News (MARTIN BRUNT), published on 15th January 2010 

“MY NEW BEST FRIEND 

Spare a thought for my new best friend Goncalo Amaral. I’m beginning to think the former detective in the Madeleine McCann case has a point when he complains about the British media attacking him. 

My Beeb colleague accused him of saying “F*** the McCanns” in an alleged off-guard moment when we all followed him out of court the other day. 

What he actually said was “Fala com McCanns” which means “Ask the McCanns”. The rest of us, through our interpreters, understood perfectly what he was saying. I think he needs a good libel lawyer. 

Isabel Duarte may be free when she has finished pursuing him over his book on the Madeleine case.” 


 The “Butterfly-Effect” states that the fluttering of a butterfly’s wings in China will start a chain of events which’s spiral will end up causing all the havoc of a major hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico.

To exemplify this effect there’s the worldwide proportion of an apparently, at least to its authors, “harmless” fib about a dead-turned-abducted little girl in the Algarve early May 2007, to the point of making her parents a well-known pair of celebrities.

We’re now looking at a butterfly straight in the eye. Amongst those in the business of deciphering, its common knowledge that the most frequent letter used in English, is the letter “e”. In a ciphered message, once you’re able to crack the most recurrent phenomena all you to do it is replace the respective space with referred letter and you’re left with a simple newspaper crossword puzzle to complete.

It’s not that simple, but you get the idea, I hope.

If the letter “e” is the most common, then I would almost say that the most recurrent word in English is the F-word. No, I’m not saying that whoever speaks the language is a pervert, or obscene by nature.

I’m just trying to highlight its common use.

Is there any movie or TV series nowadays without it?

You may not know it, but the F-word is the richest word ever created by mankind.

It can be used to express anything in a sentence. It can be a noun, a verb, an adverb, an interjection or whatever. I mean, f**k, f**k me if f**k can’t f**king be whatever the f**k we want f**k to f**king be. Or, as the Americans say, ain’t that just a f**k?!?

Others words, in other languages, may equal it, but none is able to surpass it.

I don’t know any other myself, and I know some languages, and I do find hard to believe that there’s another. So I stand by my statement that, linguistically, we’re before humanity’s greatest achievement: the F-word.

Its use is so common and useful that, unlike other interjections like heck, jeez, Gosh (written always with a hypocrital capital letter just in case God sees through the “scheme” and will punish us in the here-after) or bullocks, it remains pure and unaltered in its original form.

Now that’s a word if I’ve ever seen one. It has long lost its original connectivity to fornication, so it’s absolutely ridiculous the use of asterisks, bleeps or the “f-word” expression (one that I’m using in this post just to protect those who accuse me of sometimes (?) being obscene).

I do believe that many a child with Maddie’s age when she demised can fill in the blanks, or for the most sensitive, the asterisks, followed by a delicious giggle that only a child that age can, and was something Maddie lost together with her life on that May evening right before her mother’s eyes.

This to say, that the blowing out of proportions any and whichever use of this word, as is the case, can only mean precipitation, hysteria and having nothing else to do or hold on to. Summing it up, it reveals desperation.

But mainly, it reveals a biased mind. A preset one that is only willing to hear only what it filters. One thing is sure: it reveals a basic, animalistic type of personality. And animals usually live in herds and are known to have a commonly understood language to communicate between each other.

Things do tend to get out of control, especially in uncontrolled mind. There might be intent in being so biased, or there might only be hatred. Or profit. Or all of the above. Only one of these preformatted minds could even think that ANYONE would come out of a Court-room and utter an offense against or about a counterpart. I only see two possible reasons for one to do that: having lost the litigation, and in an insane furious outburst of having lost all, directed to the adversary who is the easy target to blame; and the other is having lost sanity completely.

Neither was the case in the interview with Gonçalo Amaral. Not even Gerry McCann would do it in one of his typical temper-tantrums, that’s how impossible I think it would be.

The British Tabloids are expected to do hateful, judgmental and with little or no research reporting. They please the ignorant that they want to keep on coming back for more.

The already referred language code existent and understood only between and by animals. But now, we have BBC making this type of thing. Oops. Now what?

Let me take just one step back. We are hearing all these things about the Portuguese coppers taking a stand saying, under oath, that Maddie not only is DEAD as her parents faked an abduction and helped conceal her body.

Yes, this has been reported submerged in the expected offensive language against Amaral and in the victimizing one in favour of the scum. But, take all the clutter away, that is the information that is coming out.

Responsible people, with adequate responsibility at the time of the events, are pinning on the couple a series of very serious accusations and are quite adamant on the little girl’s death. You don’t have to be exceptionally bright to start to wonder…these guys ARE cops. They handled the issue first-hand. What is the reason for their hatred against the McCann? Why are they doing it? What is there that makes us suspect that the Portuguese cops don’t do their job?

These suspicions are based solely upon baseless suspicions of disgracefulness, corruption and nasty drinking habits, thrown at us time and time again by tabloid-reporters. As if the Brits could give ANY moral lesson about drinking etiquette.

Corruption, where? And is Amaral treated by the Portuguese in any way that he should feel embarrassed? I see only that type of behavior coming from the McCanns.

They MUST know more than the Press does. Yet, they are treated as liars long before they even take the stand… Like as if they’re purposefully and cruelly hurting the holy couple. Well, that’s because they hate the Brits. That’s the only plausible explanation. Wait a minute, either I wasn’t paying attention, but I don’t remember the when or why there was a racial issue here to start with.

I only remember that suddenly the Portuguese cops turned to pigs the moment they called the McCanns arguidos.

Something certainly smells fishy here, and it isn’t of sardine, one’s mind continues to think, I think.

Back to the BBC blunder. Tried to get the link for the video and nothing exists anymore. I haven’t seen it yet, and somebody is being very careful in making sure that I don’t.

Me and the whole wide world. Didn’t know censorship was so prolific in the UK…

Even my friends at The Sun linked a video with Gerry rambling on about how innocent they were and how they wanted to cooperate and all that crap that we all know by heart at this point in time.

The F-word reporting was, to say the least, premature, and in whatever angle you look at it, it’s intentionally biased against a specific character in this story.

You simply don’t confuse “fala” or “fale” with “foda” or “fodam-se” (the Portuguese don’t require any asterisks as of April 1975) unless you’re looking for which and any way to smear somebody much before he has even had the opportunity to open his mouth.

The message is loud and clear: the British Press, ALL of it, is like a rabid dog ready to pounce on Amaral, and will, given the slightest opportunity, jump on him and rip his throat apart.

Why, one cannot avoid asking. Let me invert the roles in this episode. Leet me establish some parallels: SIC is Sky News, Expresso is The Sun and RTP is BBC. Suppose that the Expresso, in its online edition, announces that RTP has reported that that Gerry McCann had said, exiting the Court-room when asked something by a TV reporter had intentionally insulted the Portuguese inspector by barking a “F**k Amaral”, and walked away with a smile on his face.

Pretty unbelievable stuff, right? You would think so, wouldn’t you?

As this had come from RTP, my brain would assume it as truthful.

But pretty soon reality would sink in and very quickly see that it was not. That would make me start to wonder on the reasons that RTP would have to have to have lied so blatantly, so offensively, so out of proportion, about Gerry.

See where this is heading? I know for a fact that at least a couple of people who are demanding an official retraction from BBC. And from what I know of them, they will be as tenacious as a bulldog on a Postman’s leg. Only a vet will pry them away from that leg.

 The forthcoming BBC retraction will confirm the viciousness of the English Press, not only the Tabloids, against Amaral.

People will start to question what kind of reporting has been done on this subject. Has all been based on emotion? Why on earth would the BBC of all news agencies put foul words on the mouth of someone who didn’t say them?

Then the subsequent adding up of one on one will start. The little girl WAS Brit. This is NOT taking British stand against Portuguese. It’s all a shameful smoke screen to protect some Brits who’ve hidden the fact that their British daughter is dead.

F***K, (or “Oh My Gosh”, for the more sensitive) UK is HELPING animals to get away with murdering a BRITISH child!!!

This, together with the prospect of this book and its content being in the news for a long, long time in the forthcoming projected legal battles, can only lead to one conclusion: The time to bail out is NOW.

If this Trial was the iceberg upon the McCann’s Titanic, then this F-word Slander Stunt, was the confirmation that the water is going to overflow compartment after compartment.

The unsinkable is about to sink. What was a mistake of judgment by a reporter will catalyze the McCann’s fall. Like a butterfly fluttering its wings.

Sky News is already talking of libel… and guaranteeing that THEY understood the thing correctly immediately. I bet my bottom dollar that in many an editing room there has been given the order to start producing McCann-crucifying stories.

How they with this trial in Portugal, could “finally” get their hands on the Amaral’s book and were absolutely flabbergasted on how cunning the couple and friends have been. That they, the Press, the victms, were used by these evil scheming scum, and that, unfortunately for society, there’s no longer a death sentence in the UK.

Yes, there will be blood. The British pride will demand it. The runaway train has left the station. There simply is no stopping it now. The best that can be done is to contain the damage. I bet all the earnings out of the previous bet that right now, David and Gerry are putting on all their possible, and then some, pressure on their governmental “friends” to get them off the hook on this one.

But there are some things that are impossibilities. Let us remember that Gerry had gone back for reinforcements before this. If things were bad, now they’re much, much worse.

You want to do your part? Well, it’s pretty simple. Just join the party, and demand a public retraction from the BBC.

The more the merrier. Then, when it’s published, as it will be, by the BBC and Tabloids do find a nice and comfortable couch and enjoy the show.

Political Comissar

I
t's so nice to feel the warmth of friendship right next to you when you need it the most...

Nobel Stupidity Prize of the Millennium

I remember reading somewhere that this move by the McCanns on the Amaral's book must have been the stupidiest move ever known to mankind. Now I remember, it was right here.

Amaral was contorting himself just for a chance to have his day against you, and what do you go and do? Give him not only the chance, but the FULL media coverage for it. You dumbasses.

Had you ANY need to have heard what you heard today in Court? In a Court? I thought you were allergic to them after you suffered a serious reality-absence syndrome in May 2007... Had you any need to feel the vile felt by those that you've accused, wrongly as is your MO, to have vilified you? Nope, but you insisted to through it all. You sad nincompoops.
 

The timing was brilliant. To ask a restraining order on a book when its sale-curve wasn't going anywhere but down. You took so long to make a move against the man, which you haven't, and then go ahead in attacking his book on his homeground? Where the f*ck was your mind?!? You dim-witted lot.

Now something that you've used to your full advantage will now turn back and bite viciously your backide: the Portuguese Justice System And it will hurt. Really, really hurt. It's a vicious, vicious animal. You thick-heads.

It's unbelievable slow, inexplicably burocratic, and inexplicably easily exploited. You know that as you've milked it as much as was humanly possible. But when one is ahead, what is one's most common mistake? To be sloppy. And when the sloppy are also stupid and arrogant as you are, what's the outcome? A hint: let me laugh-out-really-loud. You morons.

A common legal process in Portugal, takes an average of 5 years. A mediatic one such as yours can take up as much as... well, let the Casa Pia one finish (it started back in 2002) and I'll tell you. You laughable losers.

Hmmm... let's check out the possibilities. Say you win. Then come the appeals, one after the other, until even YOU will feel disgusted of having your own vomit being thrown back at you, time and time again. Hearing the self-evident death of your daughter over and over again, with you, Gerry, exploding your head off in arrogant delusional anger while your partner shakes her head in a useless wimped "no, no, no..." with the expected added dramatic tears coming down her unwillingly twitching eye. Amaral has a good lawyer team behind him. He has a Law Degree himself. You'll get a real fight on his homeground. You'll have to defend with blood, sweat and tears every single inch of the way. You may win stage after stage (because, as I'll say next, I cannot see how the establishment, not you, can afford to lose this), but you've lost all. You idiots.

Say you lose. Me thinks of an expression to describe the situation... something like "deep sh*t". And do repeat freely the word "deep". Will you be able to contain all the hell that wants to break lose? That's like a humungous quantity of water pressing against the walls a feeble dam, that once burst will wash away everything in its destroying path. I mean, your buddies at SIC in Portugal and The Sun in the UK are having a pretty hard time reporting events as they are right now, imagine their desperation if the book gets back on sale. What fantasies will they be able to come up to justify that a Portuguese Court hs found it completely viable to circulate on the streets? Specially if this first stage ends AFTER the general elections in the UK? Do pray that doesn't happen, you ludicrous lot.

And all because of what? Because YOU voluntarily opened this can of worms. Your can of worms. The nightmare that has been wrecking up your nerves and has kept you up all these nights. You did it. All by your little brilliant selves. Oh, how hard it has been to keep my poise until today, and keep all this to myself, lest you give up before you heard what you heard today. It's the beginning of the end, and you ignited it. You brainless samples of human beings.

Yes, Gerry, do go "back to work" because the seat is getting unbearably hotter by the minute. Don't worry, those that "believe" that you have "work" back home that is imperative you attend to it right now, although it was never that important on your celebrity-father-of-an-abducted-girl tour of conferences, lectures and other crap. They've "bought" the "abduction", so why won't they buy this one too? It's quite clear to you, and them, that you planned your so-called "work" because you thought that this would take only a day or two in Sardineland, and were caught off-guard because it wasn't. They are as senseless as you obtuse, nonsensical sods.

Well, Gerry and Kate, do enjoy your "McCann's Exclusive Pandora's Box Adventure Ride". It will be quite thrilling, to say the least. To all of us, but mainly to you. Even you know that, albeit your remarkable and exceptional stupidity.

Update 14 Jan 2010: taken from the SKY NEWS website:


Hmmm... should I take them to Court for breach of copyright?

The Circus of Justice

Many things have been said about this symbol. At least, I’ve been told many meanings of it.

To the most depraved, well, we that are NOT that depraved can easily see in which direction simplicity might take imagination. Did I just call you a pervert? No, I won’t apologise because I thought the same, one time or another.

As said, that is simplicity. There are other ways to look at it. For example, I’ve heard that it's about feminine and masculine energies, although I was never told where which category each color represented. Only that black was bad. Mean, evil, bad. White, good, pure.

Never have I been told why is black related with negativity. It’s just a colour, or scientifically, the absence of it. Nothing else, nothing more. Yet, we each have a dark (bad) side and there are white (good) witches.

Bigoted social mind-formatting that we all are victims of, exploiting the fear that darkness instills in us.

Yes, I could go racial, using the same bigotry. Out of all, for me, the best explanation/interpretation for this symbol is the one that states that the more you’re something the nearer you are to become its exact opposite.

Place yourself in the circle, rotating along its edge, and you can check that whenever you’re placed where the color is largest, it’s also where you’re nearer to its opposite. This identifies quite clearly where Portuguese Justice stands.

Written by so many so-called intellectuals with the clear intent of it being more humane, just and fairest of all, it has ended up exactly the opposite of that.

Linking this to the trial about Gonçalo Amaral’s book, let’s look at the hard facts. Free of any reason outside the theoretical model.

An event happened, a child disappeared. Killed, abducted, whatever. The adequate party, the Portuguese Legal System, BASED ON WHAT IS KNOWN, came OFFICIALLY to the conclusion that there was NO wrong-doing or ill-faith, and thus decided to stop at once any further expenditure of its resources on the subject, or, for the common human being, archived the process, ceasing any investigation until NEW evidence is presented that is to justify the re-use of the aforementioned resources.

Somebody then publishes a book, with THE SAME information that IS KNOWN, that basically contradicts the above findings, conclusions, and most important, decisions.

That person is obviously challenging the legal establishment. Its then legitimate for the system to react and defend itself, as it's assumed that the referred system is right as it is the one that has set the whole rules in the first place.

Forget about the McCanns. Imagine that YOU were WRONGLY charged with shoplifting. The Police, after investigating thoroughly, found out that there wasn’t any evidence to support the charges against YOU.

Somebody then decides to publish a book where YOU are accused of the referred shoplifting. For Justice, before its blindfolded eyes, somebody (YOU) is being accused, privately, of what she, Justice, whilst representing adequately society, already has examined and decided upon that there should be NO accusation.

Based on this rationale, the McCann claim is quite legitimate. And, as is written, the Portuguese Justice has to attend to it, as it has. And most likely condemn Amaral accordingly. I see no other option, praying that I'm wrong.

Otherwise the establishment will have to recognize that, with the KNOWN INFORMATION, it decided wrongly. And will have to explain why. A big no, no.

The book in question contains no lies. From the author, that is. Us, who’ve read it, know that it’s quite clarifying in a very polite and peaceful way. The truth is easy to explain. The lies are all imbedded upstream, where they should have never been in the first place. But are.

The McCanns have exploited this very well. They know all too well (one cannot help wondering how and why...) the flaws of the system and explore them to the limit. Example of that is Portuguese “justice secret”. Nothing is more ridiculous. Created to protect the investigation, has ended up, instead, protecting, in a completely legal manner, the criminals no matter how big a crime they have committed.

No one has used it this mechanism as well as the Jekyll & Hyde from Rothley have. I dare say that without it, the scum would have lost right off from square one.

Another ridiculous legal mechanism is this thing called "injuction". The Portuguese Legal System is so inefficient that, by its creation, recognizes, all on its own, its total inability to provide what it is supposed to provide: Justice. Basically, all it says is: “we cannot provide you with a timely answer for your problem, but in case that we LATER find out that you are guilty we'll start condemning you as of NOW”.

That’s presumption of guilt in system supposed to protect the presumption of innocence to the utmost.

If, like I hope, the Court finds no reason to stop the sale of the book, nobody will assume the losses of sales between the time of the injunction and of the final decision. That's unjust.

If it finds reason to condemn, nothing justifies this preemptive condemning action. Unjust it is.

The Legal System in any society exists to demonstrate, in clear and concise terms, to its every single member that any and all infringement of the set rules, by itself, will be sanctioned accordingly, adequately and with justice.

The Portuguese have tried so hard to reach this end-state, that they have reached exactly the opposite.

The message sent out from the McCann case is quite clear: YES, YOU MAY KILL YOUR OWN CHILD. If this isn’t perverse, I don’t know what is.

This unintentional James Bond's kind of licence to kill is, whatever consequences I may suffer with the statement, the blunt truth. You just have to have the right friends. Ask any Portuguese about what they think, and that is the answer you’ll get. They may not put it as bluntly as I, but, bottom line, that’s what they’ll say.

And that’s why the McCanns felt the need to enter the Court through the side door. They know exactly what the Portuguese think of them. They know that the Portuguese had access to the information they desperately are trying to hide.

This said, I don’t condemn the ongoing Court procedures. It's just something the Law allows, and nobody is jumping the fence here. What I do condemn is the fact that it's allowed what is allowed.

It’s sad that Humanity having overcome two millenniums and a decade, placed a man on the moon, elected a black man as President of its most powerful nation, is still discussing a content of a book. Any book. Be it Salman Rushdie or José Saramago. Or Gonçalo Amaral. Very sad. Specially if you’re a part of the system that is doing it.

ANY country, in this day and age, should be ashamed to be discussing the legality of the content of any book (I’m obviously excluding child-pornography and those incentivizing violence and terrorism).

But, on the disgraceful scale, Portugal is, in my opinion, wrongly discussing it, while in UK it is being hidden. Much worse, and completely absurd. This is what justice has become:
 
Post Scriptum – Where is the linkage, that I cannot see, about Maddie, the “abducted” child, and a "state secret"? Specially when, for the common citizen, there is none between the child, its parents, its parent’s friends, anybody else around the child and whichever state.

So, as it has been requested, it’s completely pertinent to be assumed as FACT that THERE IS a connection. One that only a privileged few know what it is.

So, subsequent FACT is that only a privileged few know what exactly happened. And cannot speak about it. As an assumption, one could imagine that Maddie was abducted to jeopardize UK’s national interests and is this state now being blackmailed by the kidnappers. Or should I say, TERRORISTS. No,

I’m not being delusional. This is the only way I can honestly link Maddie with any possible “national security”, using the abduction crap.

If somebody knows any other way, please do enlighten me. Things are so self-evident that only the willing blind PRETEND not to see. And for these there isn't any medical miracle that can give them the eyesight that they don't wish to have anyway.

Yes, the King walks stark naked, and yet it's insisted, endlessly, that the cloth was handmade by the most skilled craftsmen.

1 Picture, 1.000 Words (...or More)

McCanns Suing Bloggers

Just read at Joana's that the enlightened duo have the intent expressed on the title.

The idea seems ridiculous at first. The time it takes to create a new blog with the materiel in question, added with the cloth of anonimity and subjective legal jurisdiction issues, one might think that these samples of human waste, were, once again, being what they are best at: stupid.

Like trying to destroy a colony of ants by defying each of its members to a 15 three-minute rounds of boxing (a sport chosen purposefully, as is civilized as the behavior of the aforementioned couple). Just taking the time factor as relevant, an impossible task.

What these jackasses want, is to bring it on. To show the meek how powerful they are through their powerful lawyes. That's how RC make a living. They scare the hell out of any possible opponent, independent of reason, just by having the legal "warfare" that they possess.

In the compared fight above, the first 100, 200, 10000 ants stand no chance. But we all know the end result.

Many a time in history, if not all the time, the might has lost against the will. And, McCanns, I, for one, will not confuse YOUR despair for will.

One last note. I don't know if it's true, but I like to believe it is, that in WW I, the British and German forces called a truce on Christmas Eve. It's said that they celebrated together, and had a soccer match on Christmas Day. On the next day they fought against each other galantly, as only soldiers know how to fight to comply with the absurdities dictated by politicians.

That is called dignity amd to fight such an opponent is an honour.

You, McCanns, have none of it. You're disgusting. You're evil. Your methods and tactics are cowardly.

Gerry and Kate, do me a favour after you've read me (and please convince all your friends to do the same): stand up and walk to the nearest mirror, look attentively to the reflection on the other side, and be ashamed of what you. Be ashamed of that face for the rest of your lives.

Do entertain me.

I know you will, because I know that's EXACTLY how you feel, in the midst of self-convincing hypnotisation you live in. And that will NEVER, EVER go away.

May You Have an Eventful 2010, McCanns

New Year's Wish - McCanns Wiped OFF the Map (... but whose wish, I wonder ?)

A friend of mine alerted me to a peculiarity that is occuring (don't exactly know for how long it's like that, as I just confirmed it) on the net.

It's usual, and understandable, for military or national security agencies to be "censored" from the digital maps that anybody can access. However, there is, at least one site that, not falling in either category, has had some privacy "privileges".

Here is a photo of Rothley, Leicester, hometown of some friends of ours:

Here is another, from another site:

Spot the differences? Only that some houses have been changed into green shrubbery. Not many... just all the ones below.

I wonder who lives in that area? And why would they like to hide in the woods.

Could it be a New Year's resolution come true, even before this one has ended? You never know with the connections these people have...

Merry Christmas, McCanns & Friends

Unfortunately for Maddie, she's unable to come home. Home, as in Rothley, that is. I hope wherever her soul is, she's in peace, and is home. I do believe in that.

About the second appeal on the opening page of the website, I beseech any of the people on the picture below to come forth and reveal where her body is. We know you know where she's laying. Please, please do let this desperate appeal touch your heart in this such meaningful season.

Give Maddie a Chance - The Video

Just doing my tiny little bit.

Just a grain of sand.

That's how much I think I represent.

But, if everyone did their bit, there would be a greater beach to be landed upon than the one's the Allies found in Normandy in their heroic plight for freedom (a sacrifice so little respected these days)

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/12/mr-and-mrs-mccann-give-madeleine-chance.html#comment-form

Caption the McCann Photo - the results

I confess I had a riot. 

The pics started to pile up, and I began to face a problem that was that I was looking in having an enormous post just with images. 

 The solution was to create a blog just for this relaxing exercise: http://caption-the-mccann-photo.blogspot.com/ 

This way, I can keep on updating it, with my own creations and with those received, voluntarily or not. Enjoy. 

Or, to some of you, not. 

That would please me.

PLACE A CAPTION, Textusa’s FIRST Online Contest

For me this picture is where the Infamous Couple is most unfortunate in their portrayal.

Look at their expression. How many adjectives can you find appropriate? So many, I’m sure, as I’m sure also that none benefit the couple.

To add to their misfortune, they hold a piece of paper right in front of them, as if asking please “please erase its insides and place your own caption on it”.

I’m thinking of some myself, and will probably use this picture with them many a time in posts yet unwritten. Do feel free to have a go.

Remember, it’s got to fit in that piece of paper:

DUMBVILLE LANE - From Rothley to Everton FC

I was "offline" at the time, but was completely surprised and totally astonished with the sad, sad spectacle that the Everton FC fans gave in Lisbon, when their club went there to play SL Benfica.

Still haven't figured if those people really believed in what they were doing or if they were trying a marketing ploy thinking that Maddie is a popular-heart-breaking-heart-warming theme amongst the Portuguese, and thus creating some positive empathy out of the stupid, ignorant "sardine-munchers".

Either case, my opinion is the same: DUMBASS STUPID.

I even thought that God had a finger on that final humiliating result. If angels could be heard, I'm sure Maddie's giggle would have been heard all the way to Rothley.

The McCann Road to Punishment

Do me a favor and picture a road in your mind. Not the one above, just any road that pops up in your brain. Although a simple request, clear and to-the-point, it has endless possibilities for an answer.

You may come up with a seaside route, or a curvy road running through mountains like wild spaghetti. You may line it with trees or simply run it through a desert. Might even throw in a sunset, or spoil it all by sprinkling it with potholes.

The point is that each and every one responds correctly to what was required: to be a picture of a road. All diverse, all correct.

What has this to do with the McCanns? Well, basically what each one of us pictures “guilt” and “punishment”.

The more purists state that one is ONLY adequately punished for a committed crime AFTER, and only after, being sentenced by a rightful Court-of-Law.

Theoretically correct, flawed simply by assuming that the Justice system is, well, JUST, and most importantly, that is able to punish ALL crimes.

So, all those that have committed a crime and are not sentenced by abovementioned Justice, are “unpunished”, or as some even say, have “got away with it”.

I’ve already written about what I think about the “innocent until proven guilty” concept. So I’ll summarize it here just by saying that it’s as naïve as misused. A person, according to it, that has committed a crime and is not sentenced, is not “unpunished” but INNOCENT.

I hear some voices saying that I should leave that to the rightful Courts. I would, if I could. If I believed in them, or, I would if they made themselves believable to me. But they don’t even try. They have, unfortunately, become just a mockery of what they were created for.

The whole gag thing on the Amaral’s book is quite a good example.

If the book, or what is written in its pages, were full of lies, or full of slander, still there is no justifiable reason that I can see to place a cloak over it, exclusively against British eyes. If lies and slander were to be valid reasons for censorship, why haven’t the authorities acted upon the British tabloids?

We, who have read it, know it lieless and slanderless.

So the reason lies not with the lies in it, but with all those surrounding it. Reasons stated by a British Judge, at least. Out of a system that I’m supposed to deposit ALL my trust on guaranteeing that all punishable are punished and all innocent are freed. Imagine that. Me telling you a blatant lie and in turn DEMANDING from you that I be treated, and looked upon, as Honest Jane. Pretty insulting, wouldn’t be? Not to mention what a show of stupidity as I wouldn’t be able to pull it off, or of arrogance if I could.

Back to the McCanns and the picture of the road. Are they guilty? In my opinion, yes. Have they been punished? In my opinion, again, yes. They are human disgust.

Reading news about Maddie is getting tiresome. People know for a fact that she’s dead. Nobody buys the McCann act anymore. Everybody has stopped caring, because they know that that pair isn't fooling nobody anymore, and are just one sorry pair of sods that, had they ANY shame, should present themselves in the nearest prison and ask, plead, beg, to be locked away for life.

And that is exactly what their state is: locked away for life. Locked in a lie, for the rest of their lives.

Locked in the fact of having played a relevant role in a fraud that involved millions, pounds and people, for the rest of their lives. Payback won't be tardy. At least on the "pound" bit.

Locked in the conscience of being guilty, for the rest of their lives.

Locked in the knowledge that each stranger is just another anonymous accuser, for the rest of their lives.

Locked in the stare of a society that knows that they are simply a couple of “unpunished”, far from innocent, for the rest of their lives.

Locked in the terror felt about the moment when Sean and Amelie will find the truth. How each of them will find it and how each will react. Will it be Sean first, or will it be Amelie? Should they be the ones to go through the hell of telling or should they trust chance to escape from this inferno? Can anything be worse than never being able to trust your own children’s stare for the rest of your life? Honestly, I can't imagine anything worse. But I can imagine the anguish it's causing. About that, the only certainty is that each day passing is one day nearer to this horrific CERTAIN reality. Amelie and Sean, drugged one night, growing maturity by the day, for the rest of their life.

Locked by Maddie’s remembrance, praying each and every day for her forgiveness, but dying never knowing if they ever got it.

I call that a sentence for life. I call that punishment.

 I will not get into Divine Justice. They may be non-believers, as, for all I know, all their church-going may be a farce as is the remainder of their lives.

As a believer, I believe that a sentence will be pronounced. But this one, not for life. A sentencing in a rightful earthly Court would be mostly a “coming-to-peace” for the couple, not to me.

I’m pretty much satisfied with their self-sentenced punishment. They have a big enough burden on their shoulders. Why then, do I keep writing?

Because, as I said before, a rightful Judge decided, purposefully, in my opinion, wrongly. Or rightly so, according to interests strange to Justice but certainly not strange to some in some strange places.

Because this particular Judge is only one of many official “players”in this absurd “game”.

Because this whole lie is so evident that only very powerful “players” may have kept it going for as long as it has been going on.

Because very powerful “players” make up a very powerful something, and when something is this powerful it affects society itself. All of us, but most important to me, me.

For all those that will read me in the future, yes, we do live in absurd, but interesting, times these days. I do hope that our humanity has finally been able discover some common sense.

If not, don’t worry, wisdom has always been built with blocks of absurdity.