As luck would have it, I'm working on a big Daily Mail post as we speak. I shall be posting it at the other place sometime over the weekend.
The Daily Mail offering us another perfect example of it's shabby agenda and quality of reporting that we have become accustomed to from Paul Dacre's shitty little rag.
But the Sun has gone with the same ridiculous connection you might say, why target the Mail?
It's all a question of honesty dontcha know. You see the Sun knows it's a shitty little rag, it doesn't try to hide the fact, it has no pretensions to offer itself as anything other than what it is, an arsewipe extraordinare.
But Dacre's McMail presents us with the same merde cloaked in some kind of, unlike the Sun, pretentious middle class piety.
Which, in my book, makes it, although you might not think possible, more dishonest than the Sun, doubly so in fact.
ETA: A question I would like to ask, perhaps one of you might know the answer.
Apart from the obvious, ie, being shut out in the cold news wise by Dot Gov, (if applicable to dot gov of course.) and contempt of court, just what would be the penalty for defying a gagging order?
A search of 'McCannfiles' for the phrase 'To be honest', preceded by 'Kate McCann', has yielded a total of 57 instances (Google returned with 7 pages-worth). Whilst the citations are not all attributable to Kate, her own usage of the phrase is disconcertingly frequent nevertheless:
Kate McCann: And obviously I can't talk too much about the investigation, umm, but, just trying to get through one day at a time to be honest Jenni. ...
9 Mar 2010 ... Kate McCann: It does and it doesn't. I mean, every day, to be honest, is... is quite difficult. I guess Mother's Day is another reminder ...
Kate McCann says she searches the flat three times before raising the alarm. .... KATE: To be honest I don't actually think that. It's a case. ...
Kate McCann: To be honest, I don't actually think that is the case. I think that's a very small minority of people that are ...
Kate McCann: I mean, I'd like to go back but… not for this, to be honest, it's kind of just below the surface, and I, just you know… I'd be scared, I think, ...
Sarah Montague: Could you consider going back to work, Kate? Kate McCann: Errr... not at the moment, it just doesn't... doesn't feel right, to be honest. ...
Kate McCann: I mean, to be honest... SIC Reporter: Do you still have the hope to tell them of a story in the future? Kate McCann: Oh, you know. ...
Kate McCann: I mean, the main thing for us is knowing if the sighting is credible or not, really. Errm... to be honest we don't go through that, …
Disappointed: Gerry and Kate McCann believe police should be doing more to find their ... "To be honest, most people were just really glad to see me. ...
It is the first time Kate McCann has left Portugal since Madeleine's abduction. .... I can't really think about that at the minute, to be honest." ...
Latest news on Madeleine McCann, Maddie, Kate McCann, Gerry McCann, Goncalo Amaral, ... and to be honest, I might have been tempted to turn round then, ...
...the ones that Madeleine has done I just can't pull down to be honest. ...... Distraught Kate McCann broke down in tears on Oprah as she made a TV appeal …
Gerry and Liverpool-born Kate McCann need the signatures of 393 members - that is more .... Kate: I think perhaps you are avoiding the issue to be honest. ...
Kate McCann: Well, they're not gonna show anything to implicate us, so I'm not... you know, I'm not concerned, if I'm honest.
20 Feb 2010 ... His wife added: "It's heartbreaking, to be honest.
Gerry and Kate McCann have given their first interview since their daughter Madeleine was abducted. ..... KM: I can't think about that Ian, to be honest. ...
Kate McCann: Errr... not at the moment, it just doesn't... doesn't feel right, to be honest. I mean, I'm very busy at the moment, there's a lot going on, ...
1 May 2008 ... Kate and Gerry McCann are set to take part in an ITV documentary marking the .... I felt like I was going to fight the world to be honest. ...
Kate and Gerry McCann interviewed by Telecinco, 23 August 2007 ..... and we switched off and, to be honest, we stopped reading the newspapers. ...
Kate McCann: "I do, maybe even more so, I strongly believe that Madeleine is out there, ...... These are the times when I go off to church, to be honest. ...
Tapas Seven Friend Flies Out To Kate McCann, 14 January 2010 ..... "If I'm honest, our daughter's been taken and nothing's ever going to be as bad as that," ...
In chapter 5 of his illuminating book, 'I Know You Are Lying' (2001: The Marpa Group), Mark McClish has the following to say in discussing an example of 'honesty':
'The applicant stated "You know..." The problem is we do not know if he is being honest. He has to tell us he is being truthful. Even if he were to say, "You know I am being honest" we still have a deceptive statement. He has not told us he is being honest. He expects us to take his honesty for granted. Believe what people tell you. If he tells you he is being honest, believe him. If he doesn't tell you he is being honest, you have to believe that too.'
Chapter 9 (Words And Phrases That Indicate Deception) and McClish is even more specific:
'In an effort to get you to believe their answer, people will sometimes use words or phrases designed to emphasise their truthfulness. However, studies have shown that when people use these words or phrases they may be giving you a deceptive answer. The following is a list of some of the more common deceptive words and phrases:
"Honest to God." "Truthfully" "To be honest." "I swear to God." "To tell the truth." "I swear on my mother's grave."
'...when you hear these words or phrases in a statement that light bulb in your head should go off. You should pay even closer attention to what the person is telling you.'
The point in relation to the above catalogue of Kate McCann's 'honest' remarks is that, in every instance, it is an 'in principle' honesty to which she refers, not her own exactly. 'To be honest' is not 'being honest' necessarily. Language offers us different structures for different logical purposes and, whether we are conscious of it or not, we choose the one which best fits the circumstances, or what it is we wish to convey exactly.
This catalogue of Kate McCann's pronouncements makes for an interesting archive when one considers that, in every instance, the statement in question may be negated by the very caveat intended to promote it.
A bit of fag ash, an old Doris and a £75 fixed penalty for littering.
Behind the door is I in picking this up .... call it what you will, story, news item, or, a testament to Twenty First England. Not that I blog about this kind of stuff anymore, but sometimes something comes along that takes the biscuit and I have to have my twopenn'orth.
As I say I'm a bit behind the door in picking this thing up, well a lot behind actually, so not aimed at you Brits per se for the news will known to you already.
To inform then, those that wouldn't normally be privy to such a tale, Furriners; especially those Furriners that have the misfortune to live in furrin parts of the world, furrin third world countries as one expects to find in the rest of Europe. Furrin Furriners that so unlike we few, we happy few, we band of brothers so blessed with fortune that our feet tread this England, this shining bright light of modern European democracy, this envy of the free world.
So to my Countrymen, to my English Brothers, my comrades in arms, prithee, let us ignore these scurrilous lies writ below, instead I invite you to join me and with true patriotic fervour raise our voices as one crying in unison: "Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; or close the wall up with our English dead, and cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'
Smoker faces £2,500 fine... for dropping cigarette ash on pavement
An elderly widow has been threatened with a £2,500 fine by council officials – for dropping cigarette ash on the pavement.
Sheila Martin, 70, was smoking at a bus stop when a warden pounced and handed her the £75 fixed penalty for littering.
The cash-strapped grandmother refused to pay and has now been warned it could rise to £2,500.
Mrs Martin, from Oldbury, West Midlands, was hit with the original fine by the Sandwell council warden after visiting her daughter on May 25.
She said: ‘I still can’t believe what happened. I was sat at a bus stop quietly enjoying a cigarette and from nowhere a warden appeared and accused me of littering.
‘I was only smoking a cigarette. It is one of the few things I can afford to buy myself.’
Mrs Martin claims she was so shocked that she later suffered an asthma attack at home and was knocked unconscious for three hours after falling over.
She said: ‘I’ve always been a law-abiding person, so this was all a big shock to me and I just keeled over.
‘I haven’t been the same since and have only got by thanks to the help of my friends and neighbours.
‘It feels like I am being victimised.’
Mrs Martin had initially refused to pay the £75 fixed penalty charge. But she has seven days to cough up or she will be summoned to court and could face a fine of up to £2,500.
‘It all seems so heavy handed,’ she said.
‘I can’t work out why the council would be so vindictive over such a petty matter. I’m so upset and angry.’ More The Wail
What gets my goat about all this is brain power. How much possessed of it, the man that could stand there and write a ticket for cigarette ash, and how unpossessed of the same attribute, those that employ the fellow and authorise him with a book of tickets?
This small extract, from this recent post, worthy you might agree, of it's own dedicated place in history. But actually it came from this slightly longer post, A Blight on Humanity Having just re-read the comments on that post it would appear that about these few words, I felt exactly the same then as I do now.
Well you would wouldn't you?
And this man has supporters!
“Without doubt, Madeleine will have suffered as a result of the negative effect this book and DVD will have had on the search for her." - Gerry McCann
Perhaps Madam Home Secretary, given the harm done by your predecessor, Jacqui Smith, to the Office of the Home Secretary, you might wish to consider the behavioural patterns of the two people who have recently appealed to your person and to your office, the Doctors McCann.
Though I have no doubt, now ensconced in your new position, you might be somewhat ill disposed to reading about the conduct of your predecessor. Be that as it may, I cannot help but feel that the few lines I lay before you might be best read rather than ignored, if for no other reason than you might not wish to appear, shall we say, Jacquiesque?
Far be it for me to remind you of those duties, and I leave this link only for the benefit of my global readership, and global it is, as it is with others who write about the travesty of the Madeleine McCann affair, such is the interest. As is I must add, scrutiny, and it too on global scale, scrutiny that focusses equally on the actions of yourself and your Office.
But fair to say you are charged with the general well being of the country, and of course not forgetting your mandate regarding the policing of this Nation.
Given then that these are the responsibilities of the Home Secretary and as such the Home Office to reflect the policies of the Secretary, it troubles me greatly the way these obligations have been implemented in the past.
Typically; the personal support by the then Home Secretary of the last two people to see Madeleine McCann alive, uncleared as persons of interest in her disappearance, and statistically the most likely persons to be involved in that disappearance, the parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, is quite frankly, scandalous.
Included in the same example is a person and an organisation, who's actions and public stance constitute such an abuse of office that it can be deemed nothing short of a criminal. That person, Jim Gamble, that office the CEOP.
I quote:
"We absolutely support the McCann family," he says, sitting in his glass-walled office in Pimlico, Central London.
"They are to be applauded for their tireless work to keep the campaign to find their daughter in the public consciousness. It is a case for every parent of 'There but by the grace of God, go I'."
And the timing of this message of unequivocal support from Jim Gamble? thirty days after the McCanns were declared Arguidosby the investigating authority, the Polícia Judiciária.
From the press.
Better protection through better understanding
UK’s Centre for tackling child sex abuse launches new unit to increase knowledge on child sex offenders Tuesday 30 October - Home Secretary, the Rt. Hon Jacqueline Smith MP will today accelerate the fight against the sexual abuse of children by opening a new dedicated unit focused on improving and sharing understanding of how sex offenders operate and think.
She will visit the UK’s dedicated organisation for tackling child sex abuse – the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre and see first hand how the Centre intends to link behavioural analysis of how offenders operate with a unique academic national qualification programme for child protection professionals who specialise in this area of criminality.
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said:
I am serious about protecting children from sexual predators– online and in the real world. We are working hard to close the net around them to make it harder for them to prey on vulnerable children. The UK has some of the strictest regulations to manage sex offenders in the world. CEOP’s new unit (Behavioural Analysis Unit) is another example of how we are leading the way in tackling child abuse. By studying the behaviour, mannerisms and language of both the abused and the abusers we will learn more about these crimes than ever before to help us investigate, deter and catch offenders – ultimately to prevent these horrific crimes.
Behavioural Analysis Unit! analyse this.
One of a pair of now iconic videos, behavioural analysis! you couldn't make it up.
And this is the other. No comment required.
To fully understand the importance of this clip one has take into account that having just fled Portugal, the McCanns feel free to tell all the lies they wish and to do so with impunity. Never realising of course to just what degree the files of the investigation would be made available to the public once the investigation was shelved.
I won't make mention of Kate McCann having the presence of mind to selectively delete the call register from her mobile phone, no that wouldn't be fair, not with her daughter just having been abducted n'all. But I have no such qualms in supplying this link that questions somewhat the veracity of NHS Doctor Gerald McCann's statement on the issue.
Blinking heck! and we have only just begun, but don't blink yourselves because you wouldn't want to miss, starting at the twenty second mark, a display that would give a criminal profiler nothing short of a category nine orgasm. It drones on from this point, though ten minutes long I couldn't get past the three minute mark, if this bugger can't keep his eyes open during the interview, then it's a big ask for me to do likewise. Behavioural analysis! you couldn't make it up.
There is much in this short video, Kate McCann talks about logic but that's by the by. Plenty of talk about "our investigators" and their many years of accrued experience. Experienced in what I must ask, drinking tea? because it doesn't sound as if it were investigative technique, and that's not just my opinion; this scathing article from the Daily McMail of all papers.
Try as she may, the interviewer attempts to pin the McCanns down on re-opening the process, they are having none of it, just the usual waffle and bullshit and of course no interview would be complete without the usual straw man, "who ever took Madeleine is sill out there."
In spite of a valiant effort from Sara Antunes de Oliveira pitching some decent questions we are treated to more nonsense from the McCanns until.....
Until that is, at the four minute forty second mark, the question is asked, "Do you consider the possibility of Madeleine not being alive?" then watch the reaction, this time, not just from Doctor Dangerous alone but from Doctor Dim as well. Guilt in stereo, behavioural analysis! you couldn't make it up.
Hey up! it's Doctor Angry. Have you heard this one before? "There is absolutely no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there is absolutely no evidence that we were involved in her disappearance." and concludes his tirade with, "That is the conclusion of the process." Err, which process? It must be a different one to that which I read, the one I read is below, I'm at a loss to which one Doctor Angry is talking about.
CONCLUSIONS OF THE POLÍCIA JUDICIÁRIA REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 2007:
“From everything that has been exposed, it RESULTS from the Files THAT:
A) the minor Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of the 3rd of May 2007;
B) a simulation of an abduction took place;
C) in order to render the child’s death impossible before 22H00, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was made up;
D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their daughter, Madeleine McCann;
E) at this moment, there seem to be no strong indications that the child’s death was not the result of a tragic accident, yet;
F) from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, doesn’t want to deliver the cadaver immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility that it was moved from the initial place of deposition. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.
Therefore, we suggest that the case files are sent to the Republic’s Prosecutor, in the Lagos legal district, for:
G) a possible new questioning of the arguidos Kate and Gerald McCann;
H) an evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case; more
I include this one for the bizarre behaviour exhibited by Doctor Dangerous, in truth I have no idea what it is all about. At the one forty eight mark watch Gerry McCann invade Kate McCann's space. By her reaction and the look on her face there is something going on, but what?
Below, a still of the incident courtesy of the McCann Files.
Nothing quite so ambiguous in this short wooden performance by Kate McCann. Five seconds in it would appear Doctor Dangerous isn't too happy with Kate, wandering from the script? Whatever it is, we have McCann's eyes shut and a squeeze to madam's shoulder. A rather strange look passes from him to her after Kate has finished giving what has to be the most unconvincing appeal by any mother of a missing child in the annals of history. One minute seven seconds.
The now infamous reply by sniggering father of missing girl, "Ask the dogs Sandra." Sandra Felgueiras starts the questioning about the dogs at the four minute fifty mark, receiving a truly outrageous answer from the repulsive Gerry McCann.
Poor sound on the first clip, so you may wish to push the thing on to the relevant mark. A three second version on the lower clip.
Perhaps it's a blessing that I cannot find the clip from which these stills originated. I don't know about you guys but I have certainly had my fill of watching these two creatures for a while.
A few pics to wind up this sordid exhibition.
And no show would be complete without the dogs, but we all know just how terribly unreliable they can be. Just ask Gerry McCann.
To finish up let me try and apply some perspective to this staggering and blatantly obvious miscarriage of justice.
If our featured two were suspected of robbing a Post Office, and it's not by accident that I use a PO as an example, because, you may be surprised to know, there is no greater crime in the UK than making an unauthorised withdrawal from said establishment.
So if our two suspects, under questioning, displayed the same behavioural patterns as we have witnessed, what might you think the outcome would be?
I have oft mused and occasionally suggested that it would be something quite peripheral, or perhaps something altogether unrelated that would occasion this house of cards to come a tumbling down.
That said, Robert Murat's action against Jane Tanner, and the rest of 'em if I'm not mistaken, could hardly be considered unrelated nor peripheral for that matter.
I had thought to ask the question, would this be the thing that allowed the knot of gold cord to be undone, the box to be opened and the letting out of all evil. But that I cannot do, for evil already walks among us, that evil is Kate and Gerry McCann, and must be said, their acolytes, we must never forget them.
Whether the child was abused in life I have no idea, but we have all witnessed the degree to which Madeleine McCann was abused in death, and that is truly evil.
Jane Tanner Again By John Blacksmith
Those attempting to follow the rather muted court proceedings involving Robert Murat and Jane Tanner may be interested in a little more background regarding the events that prompted them. Just how much comfort the outcome will bring to those interested in the facts of the McCann affair and the possibility of truth emerging, however, is another matter.
The complaint by Mr Murat is a criminal, not a civil, one of “calumnious denunciation”. From that marvel of infinite flexibility, the Portuguese Penal Code, we learn that anyone “who by any means, before the authority or publicly, with the knowledge of falsity of the imputation, denounces or casts upon a determined person the suspicion of the practice of crime, with intent that against her it is placed a legal proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment up to 3 years or with a fine.” To prove such a charge, convincing evidence that the perpetrator “had knowledge of the falsity of the imputation” would obviously be crucial.
No such evidence has been or will be adduced for the very good reason that there isn’t any, despite the continued scattergun smearing of M/S Tanner and her supposed motives by the usual suspects.
But clause two reads: “If the conduct consists in the false imputation of unlawful fact or disciplinary penalty, the agent is punished with imprisonment of up to 1 year or a fine of up to 120 days.”
Now that’s a different ball game altogether. No need for a lawyer to dive into the outdated cess-pit of conspiracy, cover up and covert political protection in the hopeless attempt to show that M/S Tanner knew that she was making a false accusation against Robert Murat: just establishing that she had pointed a finger at him without malice or motive might well be enough to secure a conviction, leaving all sorts of juicy possibilities of civil actions stretching far into the future.
Because a very convincing argument can be made that it was neither the infamous Lori Campbell, nor the three Tapas 9 members with their stories of spotting Mr Murat on the night of May 3, who triggered the police into all-out action, thus effectively ruining Murat’s life; no, it was the supposed identification of Murat as the shadowy figure later known as “bundleman” that was crucial. More The Blacksmith Bureau
