Good Quality Wristbands

Blog News

2012-01-10T15:01:00.001Z

I have arrived at the conclusion that it was a mistake for me to re-open this and other McCann related blogs. There will be no more updates, comments will close after today. Thank you.

The absence of the child took more space than her presence.

2012-01-10T12:57:00.002Z

Curious Case of Madec Macand. (NOT to be confused with Madeleine McCann!)

An interview with the Author of "Belle Famille", Arthur Dreyfus. Spudgun

Did Jim Gamble Sanitize Gerry McCann's CATS File 19309?

2012-01-09T10:02:00.014Z

Because if he did, it would certainly be in keeping with all the other anomalous behavior exhibited by Jim Gamble regarding Arguido, Gerry McCann. (See Jim Gamble tag)

This topic of discussion is far from new, though no less important for being that, but it is doing the rounds currently on Twitter. Much of it revolves around this claim by a certain 'KaOssis.' Posted verbatim.

Gerry McCann was convicted for child sex abuses in 2002, althought the evidence has been hacked and emptied from the case file by someone who has access to the National Sex Offenders Register, namely Jim Gamble though the CEOP mainframe connected to every police station crime files in the UK, the reference for this conviction still exists in the judiscial reference files and confiemes that Gerald P McCann was placed on the Child Sex Offenders Register following conviction in court, and is still on that register today! .

Much more than that I don't feel it's necessary to post; principally because there are mountains of stuff to be had by searching the net:

Gerald McCann CATS system registration number 19309

Failing a Google search, you could do worse than paste these URLs into your browser. It is the comments that are of much interest as anything else, and of course, those by KaOssis.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/09/05/peadophile-ring-with-link-to-madeleine-mccann-jailed/

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1354-gerald-mccann-cats-system-registration-number-19309

There are just three issues in this hypothesis that I would like to mention, the first of those being importantly, the date that the, CATS system registration number 19309, was registered. That date having to be pre-March 2007 to have any significance.

Secondly, irrespectively of date; why is the file empty?

And thirdly, Gerry McCann's claim that he had is wallet stolen, or more importantly, his credit card. Because if we are to attach the same significance to the missing credit card that the writer does, I.e. McCann had to show that his credit card had been in a third party's possession, should various nefarious online activities concerning said card, ever come to light.

Because there has to be some significance to the credit card, why else would McCann come out with a tale of such incredulity surrounding the 'stolen wallet' that it makes the claim that Madeleine was abducted, almost plausible?

Gerry McCann has his wallet stolen. A day or two later it is returned to him, I'm not sure how, returned to him sans Pounds Sterling, but complete with credit cards and thirty Euros.

I'm going to have a Bill Maher moment here, and say; Imagine the balls it takes, to stand in front of another human being and tell them that?

Because let's face it, you believe that? Then not only do I have a bridge to sell you, I have a river full of bridges that I want to sell you.

Oh! and by the by, I think this must be the thirty Euros in question. The wallet saga. & more wallet saga.

Martin Brunt: Life o' Crime

2012-01-03T01:11:00.003Z

Martin Brunt: Fail

Happy New Year

2011-12-31T18:09:00.000Z

Not Born Yesterday (Mister)

2011-12-29T19:06:00.009Z

No, me neither old lad.

Clip by, who else?

Below: Please turn your volume DOWN.

h/t SteelMagnolia

I've already pinched the two clips above and I don't have the brass neck to pinch another. But watching the last clip at the same site, inspired a small modification to the original graphic.

Because as we all know, there is absolutely... Oh do be quiet!

I've just nicked another one. and if you watch it you will know why. I notice that this isn't his only webcam, but I shall save those for tomorrow's look see.

Apart from this one that is.

I wouldn't necessarily want him as a son-in-law, but I'd go for a pint with the fellow. He's a star, as mad as a brush star, but a star nonetheless. Have a wander through some of his webcams.

Bury This McCann Crap Along with Madeleine: An Essay From The Heart

2011-12-28T21:56:00.008Z

I do have it preserved in its entirety, for posterity's sake, heaven forbid it were to disappear into the big cyber hole. And I would dearly like to paste all the McCann related text on this here page. Like to yes, but I can't, I would be doing too great a disservice to the writer were I to do so. Quite simply, it is an essay in its own right, and should be read as such.

Though there is much written about the McCanns, I feel that the piece affords the McCanns their true worth, that of incidental scumbags in the grand scheme of things. That's not to say the writer doesn't vent his spleen in this piece, written so obviously from the heart.

A taster then.

eta: Having read again and digested the thing at leisure, what can I say but, bloody good stuff!

Bury this McCann crap along with Madeleine
By Stanley Collymore
13 December 2011

....What has any of this to do with Kate and Gerry McCann I hear you ask? A great deal really as they’re evidently the kind of odious persons that fit comfortably into the pattern of those I have described earlier and that the world would be a great deal better off without and that’s putting it mildly. For here are two individuals that take lies and render them as the truth, who in spite of their evident and numerous faults and a marked rejection in acknowledging these must lay squarely with them instead haughtily thrust them onto the shoulders of anyone that their pathological feral mindset dictates they should and moreover can expectantly as of right anticipate that everyone else will accordingly and unquestioningly agree to; and so far they’ve been rather successful in this sick and quite perturbing ruse of theirs.

Without exception everyone I’ve spoken to about Madeleine or of their own accord has raised the matter with me in the UK or abroad is categorically of the view which I share that there has been no abduction of this girl who we firmly believe is dead and has been from the outset, and that her parents subconsciously guilt wracked but even so attention seekers par excellence and comprising mum Kate who more fittingly could be described as a contemporary Lucria Borgia kitted out with an evidently hen-pecked husband, no need to ask who wears the trousers in their house, are the ones that are solely responsible either intentionally or accidentally for Madeleine death and the disappearance of her body.

Furthermore I’m decisively convinced and every gut instinct reinforces this view that these two murderers, for if Madeleine was killed intentionally there is no getting away from the fact that murder is the crime in question and if her death was accidental and her parents are putting on this elaborate charade to deflect attention away from what really happened manslaughter is no longer a preference as would have been the case had they come clean from the start, are wholly culpable for what happened to their daughter. Let me emphasize the point; if I crash into you and you initially perceived it was an accident but my subsequent body language, no apology on my part to you and all this reinforced by a dismissive and even hostile attitude by me towards you and what happened, could anyone blame you for thinking that maybe what I did wasn’t an accident after all and what took place was a premeditated assault by me cleverly made to come across like an accident? And when one adds to that the case of perverting the course of justice I don’t any rational person would view it as a laughing matter.

It’s my honest opinion and in the absence to-date of any incontestable evidence to the contrary from the McCanns or anyone else is also my unshakable position that Kate and Gerry McCann after Madeleine’s death conspiratorially either with each other or with the misguided assistance of others whom they knew well and could therefore trust implicitly clandestinely and carefully disposed of Madeleine’s body. The rest of this absurd pantomime and especially the McCanns’ elaborate and to my mind highly improbable and entirely unconvincing story is sheer theatre of the macabre written, acted out and diligently directed by a woman that is very evil, exceedingly clever with it and with a remarkable penchant to make her malignity appear plausible and even respectable. Who knows exactly what strings to pull and when to do so; what sympathies of her audience to dexterously play on; and significantly what innate prejudices they have that she, Kate McCann can self-centredly exploit to her maximum advantage while simultaneously with a totally contrived but photogenically conspicuous humility giving a classical portrayal worthy of an Oscar nomination of a most unfortunate but run of the mill, hard done by mother, woman and wife, specifically contextualized in that order to fuel the most empathetic reaction possible in her favour, and in whose mouth butter wouldn’t melt. Well I don’t buy any of it, have never done so from the outset of this loathsome saga, and never will. more

h/t Gasper Statement.

Life's Little Jigsaw Puzzle

2011-12-27T11:01:00.005Z

And don't think there weren't a million other pics I could have utilised.

Portuguese Law - The 'Arguido' Status

2011-12-22T11:57:00.005Z

Portuguese law - the 'arguido' status
Mediabeak would like to thank an anonymous comment contributor on our previous post about the McCanns.
16.11.07

Given the frustration at the lack of new news coming out of the Madeleine McCann investigation it was easy to point the finger at the much maligned investigation and secrecy laws which bind it. While it would not be unfair to say that there were certain shortcomings in the early stages of the investigation, these were perhaps added to and distorted by mistaken understanding of the Portuguese 'arguido' suspect status and secrecy surrounding investigations. We are used to the way contempt laws work in the UK or the way they have minimal meaning in other jurisdictions. While the UK contempt laws seek to secure the administration of justice and its - and those concerned (jury, witnesses, public) with it who may be influenced or prejudiced, the Portuguese system focuses heavily on the preceding investigation. In the UK strict liability contempt is engaged when someone is arrested, whereas in Portugal, the 'arguido' status applies to anyone who is made a suspect (arrest not being necessary)or wants to be protected by the system.

Mediabeak thinks its time to contribute some more information about the system we have been quick to criticise. We haven't edited our anonymous friend's submission and are posting their contribution below:

The arguido status

In Portuguese law a person is constitued as an arguido when she or he is suspected of having committed a crime.

A person can request to be made "arguida" because he or she will benefit from rights that he/she does not have as a witness. Apart of the obligation of being accompanied by a lawyer when giving depositions in front of police authorities, the arguido has the right to remain silent and not reply to any questions. This means that as a potential suspect he or she is acting in their own defence. A witness by law is obliged to reply to all questions.

A person is constituted arguido during the investigation phase when sufficient evidence is collected to formulate an accusation. At that time, the less serious of the coercive sanctions which is the "term of identity and residence" is applied to the arguido. This term can be translated as a kind of conditional liberty where the arguido is obliged to inform the police authorities whenever he/she is absent for more than 5 days. An arguido can also be submitted to other coercion measures, the most severe being the "preventive arrest", which is usually applied when there is the danger of escape, disturbance of the investigation, possibility of destroying evidence, etc.

Secrecy of justice....more

Previous: Lord Justice Leveson - Arguido

h/t Maren.

Lord Justice Leveson - Arguido

2011-12-21T17:52:00.007Z

Am I being uncharacteristically pedantic here, in highlighting this particular passage, or do you too feel that there is something not quite right in Justice Leveson quoting Gerry McCann as to just what the definition of Arguido might, or might not be?

It wasn't many minutes after this, that I shut up shop for the day and went out. I had heard quite enough by this time.

Watching someone openly pursue an agenda, does tend to have that effect on me.

Robert Jay Q.C.

David Pilditch

Lord Justice Leveson

Page 63

3 Q. The McCanns were given arguido status under Portuguese

4 law I think on 7 September 2007?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. It might be said, well, you could not write the story.

7 There was no imperative to write stories which you knew

8 wouldn't stand up to legal scrutiny. Do you see that

9 point?

10 A. Yes. But the position that we were in was that this was

11 probably the most significant development that had

12 happened up to that time in the investigation.

13 Q. Sorry, what was, Mr Pilditch?

14 A. Well, when the McCanns were named arguidos. It's not

15 something you could ignore. It's not something where

16 you could just present a story that was based on

17 a comment from the McCanns' official spokesperson.

18 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Did you do any work to find out

19 precisely what that meant in Portuguese law?

20 A. Yes, a lot of work, yeah. We spoke to lawyers in

21 Portugal, and it was explained to me that there were

22 subtle differences between arguidos and suspects.

23 There's no legal equivalent.

24 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: They're merely entitled to have legal

25 representation and have other advantages, isn't that

P 64

1 right? That's what Dr McCann told us, I think.

2 I remove the word "merely" from what I just said.

3 A. No, we were given a completely different version by the

4 lawyers in Portugal. We were told that effectively an

5 arguido is a suspect. It gives the police an

6 opportunity to put much tougher questions than they

7 could to a witness, and they were allowed legal

8 representation and I think the McCanns themselves were

9 given some very, very tough questions from the

10 Portuguese police.

11 LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: So proceedings in English terms would

12 be active?

13 A. There are subtle differences, but I don't think they

14 were arrested or anything like that. But effectively

15 that was the -- was what was explained to us by the

16 lawyers in Portugal.

17 MR JAY: Yes. I'm not sure whether you fully saw the point Blah blah

The Dangers of Celebrity

2011-12-20T12:40:00.003Z

It's a John Blacksmith piece and I should send you directly to his article. Under any other circumstances I would do just that. But because of a truly inspired, if not brilliant use of clip a to further demonstrate the words in Blacksmith's article, I really do have to send you to Steel Magnolia. You will understand why when you get there.

The Dangers of Celebrity

Why won’t they just shut up? Or, to put it more delicately, why are they just as intent now on getting stories into the media as they were, say, in the far off days of November 2007? What’s going on?

A campaign?

Yes, absolutely. Not the diary nonsense—that wasn’t part of any plan, only Mitchell aiming a fire extinguisher at the flames ignited in the Leveson inquiry. For the rest, just look at the evidence.

The McCann stories over the last month have been invented and offered to the media, not sought out by them, and they are all linked. Equally they haven’t been provided transparently in the normal manner—by media conferences or press releases—but by a news management team using the usual tricks: anonymity, source material restrictions, contact with favoured journalists, “false dialogues” (in which one of the media team pretends to be responding to a story which they have in fact provided) and a definite “line”. All the kind of stuff which isn’t far from phone hacking in its conscious duplicity and which has helped to land the press in its present miserable state.

The material about Scotland Yard, about Metodo and about the latest “abduction” claim has all been provided using these tricks and the parents are clearly the source. Ah, the supporters of the parents might say, this is all part of the never-ending “search for Maddie”.

No. The first Scotland Yard story speculating about the Barcelona sighting does not appeal for further information but actively misleads; the second Scotland Yard-related piece about Metodo does not seek information about the child;the latest story about “police accept abduction theory” is concerned only with the veracity of the parents’ version of events and does not involve Madeleine McCann at all.

Who gains? More Steel Magnolia

Cop Art: The Rise of the Citizen Satirist

2011-12-18T20:58:00.011Z

As you can no doubt imagine, I can associate with this.

.....But Pike's actions were bizarre, and thus, this satiric "Photoshop Justice" (as BoingBoing writer Xeni Jardin dubs it) seems to better capture the moment, and the moral outrage the viewer feels, than the photo itself. Great satire does just this: it turns reality on its head, making us laugh while, at the same time, revealing some sort of ugly truth that we can't confront without laughing.

Cop Art: The Rise of the Citizen Satirist
by Adam Bessie
Sunday 18 December 2011

"My name only comes up when some a-hole wants to end an argument..., " Adolf Hitler yells to his generals in the climax of a 2004 film "Der Untergang." depicting the final ten days of the Third Reich. "Now you tell me some campus cop is 'The New Face of Evil?'"

Indeed, Hitler is right for once - at least, the Hitler created by filmmaker Sarah Harbin, who dubbed the brilliant YouTube satire "Hitler Reacts to Pepper Spray Mime," posted November 22. Four days earlier, on November 18, University of California, Davis campus cop Lt. John Pike, who casually pepper-sprayed students at an Occupy protest in the quad of my alma mater, has become the "New Face of Evil," his blasé use of excessive force a social media phenomenon on par with Charlie Sheen's "Winning" rants.(1)
Pike - "Casually Pepper-Spray Everything Cop" - has become an icon, a cartoon, digitally cut from the UC Davis protest and pasted into history. He has been Photoshopped into pretty much every famous image available on Google; he's pepper-spraying baby seals, Steven Hawking, the "Wizard of Oz's" Cowardly Lion, the Declaration of Independence, MC Escher, and doing so with his trademark cool detachment. He has a Twitter account with over 1,000 followers, where he brags: "My kid can pepper spray your honor student. " He also reviews pepper spray on Amazon: "Whenever I need to breezily inflict discipline on unruly citizens, I know I can trust Defense Technology 56895 MK-9 Stream, 1. 3 percent Red Band/1. 3 percent Blue Band Pepper Spray to get the job done!" And, of course, he has a T-Shirt available at CafePress, just for toddlers: "Eco-conscious parents love this Pepper Spray Cop Butterflies toddler t-shirt that is super soft on young skin, yet durable enough for the most rugged play time." (Like getting pepper-sprayed?) Want to know more? You can find links to all this information on "Casually Pepper Spray Everything Cop" on his Wikipedia entry (or his more complete and insightful entry, where I did my research, at Know Your Memes).
But you probably know all of this. As of writing this today - one week after Pike sprayed his way into history - I'm already very, very late to the Pepper Spray Cop game (In fact, I'm already showing my age, as he already has an acronym: PSC). There have already been a number of astute analyses on PSC, most notably Megan Garber's November 21 essay from Harvard's Neiman Journalism Lab, "Image as Interest: How Pepper Spray Cop could change the trajectory of Occupy Wall Street." She dissects PSC with insight and intellectual vigor usually reserved for the famous paintings into which PSC is now carefully Photoshopped. Garber observes that the image takes on "almost allegoric dimensions," imbuing it with the universal resonance of "the powerless being exploited by the powerful," which renders the "particularities (geographical location, political context) all but irrelevant."

Pike is not a cop; he's not at UC Davis, and the students are not students. Rather, to Garber, the iconic image of Pike coolly spraying the students is transcendent, rising above any of the particularities of the real event, and reaching toward the timeless struggle for equality, "a kind of ... Platonic concern ... [becoming] something more than a political movement." In other words, the image of PSC walking down the Beatles' Abbey Road, spraying Paul in the face, is more than a joke - no, our laughter helps us reach toward the best of human nature, toward Plato's "Republic."

Call it Sgt. Pepper's Republic.

And, no doubt, the PSC craze may seem about as bizarre as the Beatles' "Sgt. Pepper" album (on which someone has pasted Pike, as well). But Pike's actions were bizarre, and thus, this satiric "Photoshop Justice" (as BoingBoing writer Xeni Jardin dubs it) seems to better capture the moment, and the moral outrage the viewer feels, than the photo itself. Great satire does just this: it turns reality on its head, making us laugh while, at the same time, revealing some sort of ugly truth that we can't confront without laughing. Consider Jonathan Swift's "Modest Proposal" for helping the poor in Ireland, by serving their infants "stewed, roasted, baked or boiled, " in a "wholesome ... fricassee or ragout. " While few remember the particulars of what Swift was satirizing in 1729, his bizarre and beautiful "Modest Proposal" reveals a sort of universal moral outrage on the treatment of the poor - which still, to this day, in its utterly true strangeness, makes us laugh, and makes us mad, all at the same time.

Yet, though riotously funny, @PepperSprayingCop is not ghostwritten by Swift. It's not even written by a single author, nor by a team of comedians at The Onion - rather, this satire has been crowd sourced, composed in the cloud by thousands of anonymous citizen satirists, who use Photoshop to make a mockery out of the photos and videos taken by citizen journalists. Formerly, popular satire was only the terrain of the professionals, like Swift or Jon Stewart, who had earned and scrapped their way to satirical stardom, making it into our textbooks and TVs; now, anyone with Photoshop can cut and paste their way to our attention, and make us cry with laughter and rage.

"Pepper Spray Cop" is satire by mob.

For San Francisco State University English lecturer and Philip K. Dick scholar David Gill, writing in a Facebook post, the PSC phenomenon is "heartwarming and brilliant." The ceaseless satires of Pike, these "new juxtapositions of cruelty with iconic images of Americana allow us to replay our outrage over and over again, all the while rewarding us with humor. "In other words, Gill astutely points out that these satires - repeated over and again in new forms - make us laugh, but also allow us to experience the outrage over Pike's actions, over and again, keeping our anger actively burning beneath our chuckles."(2)

I think Gill is right - our citizen satirists, who have made Pike pepper spray the innocent across history, who have made him the "New Face of Evil, " who have turned him into a transcendent allegory of oppression, have captured the spirit of injustice, keeping our outrage aflame longer and brighter than it might with the images by themselves.

But I also think that, by pulling Pike from his original context, by yanking him from the UCD protest, and turning him into a cartoon character - "Casually Pepper Spraying Everything Cop" - we also stripped him, and the protesters, of their humanity. Pike, nor the protesters, are allegory, but are real people, engaged in a real struggle, in a real place - and once Pike is everywhere, he is nowhere. By repeating his image over and again, it is transmogrified from the horrific, to the humorous, and ultimately, the meaningless, not unlike Andy Warhol's Pop Art images,(3) yet instead of Marilyn Monroe repeated again and again, it's Lieutenant Pike's fire-red mustache.

Call it "Cop Art. "

The ultimate irony - or perhaps, "Photoshop Justice" - is that the citizen satirists dehumanize Pike as he dehumanized the protesters. In doing so, the citizen satirists have pulled the injustice of Pike's actions from the original, real-life context, and abstracted it so distantly from the "particularities" of history that the image is bled of the moment, becoming nothing more than a static icon, a symbol of injustice, to be turned into a logo for a toddler T-shirt, not unlike Che Guevara or Nike, ready for manufacture in a factory somewhere far away. (But to stave off his pain, as one of my friends put it, Pike could make a mint if he were savvy enough to trademark his image now.)

Perhaps, I just don't get the joke - as I told you, I'm late to the "Pepper Spray Cop" game. After all, as one of Hitler's generals famously advised him: "Mein Führer, some people don't understand satire. "

Truthout

Story

Crossposted at The McCann Gallery with a few examples of 'Photoshop Justice.' Although in my particular case, Paintshop Justice.

Lord Leveson the New Hutton?

2011-12-17T15:52:00.001Z

My own observation is that the fact that Lord Justice Leveson HIMSELF is known for attending Soirées and parties at the home of Mathew Freud, husband to Elizabeth Murdoch who is the daughter to erm......RUPERT Murdoch...... kind of compromises any claim to his total impartiality in the ongoing matters. more Spudgun's Spoutings

Money Money Money Madeleine McCann Inc

2011-12-17T14:45:00.003Z

Oh please please let the truth come out, that Clarence Mitchell gave the screws the go ahead to publish Dr Dim's diary.

Please let this be the long awaited back door that is the gateway to bring this farce to an end.

For more detailed coverage of this and similar, please go to themurdochempireanditsnestofvipers

News of the World made hush payment of £125K to McCanns

Confidential deal towards search fund for Madeleine was part of apology for tabloid's publication of mother Kate's diary extracts
Daniel Boffey
17 December 2011

The News of the World paid £125,000 to the fund supporting the search for Madeleine McCann as part of an apology for publishing Kate McCann's diaries – on condition that the terms of the deal remained secret.
The payment was made after the missing girl's parents expressed their outrage at the story, which Kate McCann said made her feel "mentally raped". All the parties involved in the negotiations over the payment, which was agreed in September 2008, were asked to sign a confidentiality agreement hiding the scale of the newspaper's culpability.
The payment was made despite claims by the defunct newspaper's editor at the Leveson inquiry last week that he believed he had had the full support of the McCanns to publish. Colin Myler, who edited the NoW from 2007 until it closed this year, told the inquiry he had received repeated assurances from his head of news, Ian Edmondson, that the McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, supported publication – a claim which has been strenuously denied.
Myler told the inquiry that he subsequently ran an apology and paid a "substantial sum" because "he felt very bad that she didn't know". However, the Observer has learned that the NoW initially tried to minimise the compensation. A source at News International, the owner of the newspaper, said there were hours of negotiations between the newspaper's lawyers and Carter-Ruck, the solicitors hired by the McCanns, in the days following publication of the story on 14 September 2008.
A deal was finally struck in which a £125,000 payment was agreed, but all parties were obliged to sign agreements that they would not talk about the size of the compensation. Last night Kate and Gerry McCann's spokesman declined to comment on the revelation.
The Leveson inquiry into the media will hear this week from former NoW sports journalist Matt Driscoll, who was awarded almost £800,000 for unfair dismissal in April 2007 while on long-term sick leave for stress-related depression following a campaign of bullying provoked by the newspaper's then editor, Andy Coulson.
It will also hear via video link from Piers Morgan, former editor of the Daily Mirror and the NoW, who now works for CNN in New York. At 28, Morgan was appointed editor of the NoW, making him the youngest tabloid newspaper editor in history. He was editor of the Daily Mirror for more than 10 years, but was sacked in 2004 after the newspaper conceded that photos it published apparently showing British soldiers abusing an Iraqi were fake.
Morgan claimed in a GQ magazine interview in 2007 that phone hacking was "widespread" and that "loads of newspaper journalists were doing it" when Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire were jailed in January of that year.
Asked in the interview whether he knew about voicemail interception while he was editor of NoW, Morgan said: "Well, I was there in 1994-95, before mobiles were used very much, and that particular trick wasn't known about. I can't get too excited about it, I must say. It was pretty well known that if you didn't change your pin code when you were a celebrity who bought a new phone, then reporters could ring your mobile, tap in a standard factory setting number and hear your messages. That is not, to me, as serious as planting a bug in someone's house, which is what some people seem to think was going on."
In 2006 Morgan wrote an article for the Daily Mail claiming that he was played a tape of a message Paul McCartney left on the mobile phone of Heather Mills. "The couple had clearly had a tiff, Heather had fled to India, and Paul was pleading with her to come back," he wrote. "He sounded lonely, miserable and desperate, and even sang We Can Work It Out into the answerphone." gruniad

Dear Roy Why The Press Needs to Highlight the Sins of the McCanns

2011-12-16T14:31:00.002Z

Whoops! a slight slip of the keyboard there, but I'm sure you will forgive me?

In a style with which we have become so accustomed to by now, sycophantic drivel, it being the only description that we can apply to any article written by Roy Greenslade on the subject of the McCanns.

But of the particular article in question, of that I will spare you, it being available at the link below.

Not the article in question then, rather, one of the subsequent comments left there. Asking as much as I would ask, albeit in a somewhat more polite fashion, this from CloudCastle.

Re - Why the press needs to highlight the sins of the News of the World

Roy,

What's your blind spot with the McCanns, or are you simply using them to have a go at Colin Myler?

Let's put aside this class-warfare nonsense, shall we? It doesn't matter what class the kids were. The McCann kids and those of the rest of their party were left alone in their apartments most nights of the week's holiday while their parents went out to dinner. Madeleine, at 3, was the eldest.

Do you, like Montaignac above, actually believe the McCanns' claims of an abduction? What piece of evidence makes you think this? The released police files show no evidence of an abduction. All that we have is a claim by Jane Tanner that she saw someone carrying a little girl, at a a time when both Gerry McCann and an independent witness say Tanner was not on the street. The waiting staff at the Tapas restaurant state she didn't leave the table. The police found no evidence of damage to the shutters or fingerprints other than those of Kate McCann and the handprint of a less than careful policeman. The only other sighting that supports the view that the child was carried away is that of Mr Smith, who says he is 60% certain the man he saw was Gerry.

(No opinions here, just evidence from the police files.)

On the other hand, we have sniffer dogs who indicate the odour of a dead body in the McCanns' apartment and hire car, on the car key, on Kate and Madeleine's clothing and on the child's soft toy. In no other cars or apartments searched did the dogs indicate odour or blood. Since being released from arguido/arguida status, the McCanns have failed to address any of the contradictions in their statements or the issues raised by the dogs, not least because the British press has not raised these questions with them.

Over the last eighteen months, we've witnessed how far the standards of British journalism have fallen. Sections of the UK press have merely cut and pasted the most outlandish claims not only of the Portugese press, but the McCann PR team. We've had endless sympathetic hand-wringing opinion columns from writers - I hesitate to call them journalists - who never leave their desks. We've had articles like this one by Roy - an article about an article about the retrospectively written teenage-ramblings of Kate McCann. We've had Lori Campbell in the Mirror pointing the finger at the wrong man, Robert Murat, and getting the Young Journalist of the Year Award for it. We've seen packs of journalists chasing sightings of little girls around the streets of Brussels.

Show me, please, one article in 2008 where the editor of a newspaper has given his reporter the freedom to investigate this case properly. Where are the interviews with the Tapas 7, whose stories simply contradict one another? Why have we seen no interview with Brian Kennedy, who bankrolled the McCanns and flew down to 'interview' Robert Murat? Why has no paper investigated how the Madeleine Fund, a limited company not a charity, has spent the hundreds of thousands of pounds sent to it from children, parents and grandparents from all over the world, details it refuses to make transparent?

Is investigative reporting just too hard for your colleagues today, Roy? Is it easier, not just cheaper, to regurgitate press releases or quote 'a friend of the family'?

Is that why, Roy, the press needs to highlight the sins of the News of the World? Is it because it's easier and cheaper than highlighting the sins of the McCanns? Article

I haven't as yet, simply because I have no desire to do so, trawled through the comments, to see if this particular one received a reply. Needs must I suppose; but not right now.

h/t themurdochempireanditsnestofvipers.blogspot

It's a Fair Cop... and the £1m Lawsuit

2011-12-12T09:59:00.004Z

It's a Fair Cop... and the £1m Lawsuit

Such an appalling, biased report from Sky, let's spin the McSpin...

The £1m lawsuit by bungling parents Kate and Gerry McCann against the lead Portuguese detective in the hunt for missing Madeleine will be heard early next year, it is understood.

The civil case against Goncalo Amaral - who was in charge of the investigation for five months after the McCanns neglected their children - will take place in Lisbon on February 9th and 10th, according to a source close to the couple.

The globetrotting couple, both in their forties have made a fortune hard-selling a book, appearing on many television shows, selling themselves (and their children) to the highest bidder and settling various litigations out of court.

In a 36-page writ, lodge in June 2009, they accuse Mr Amaral of libel and breaching their human rights.

The couple, from Rothley in Leicestershire, are expected to attend court but despite lodging the writ themselves, will not give evidence. Whilst arguidos, the McCanns chose to hide behind the skirts of judicial secrecy. Due to the unscripted nature of a court case, speculation has arisen as to the reasons why their lips will once again be sealed.

"The McCanns have made Amaral's life hell and they have made themselves rich in the process." a source said. "Kate and Gerry just want him to stop quoting from the official police investigation and insisting that justice works in silence."

In their writ, the self-obsessed, manipulative, money-grabbing McCanns describe the now-retired detective as... a self-obsessed, manipulative, money-grabber with no morals. more

Justice works in Silence: Gonçalo Amaral

2011-12-09T23:15:00.004Z

“Justice works in Silence”
Gonçalo Amaral

His life has been ripped apart since he led the police investigation into the Millennium’s greatest mystery, and came into legal confrontation with Kate and Gerry McCann. Gonçalo Amaral has lost his family, his business, his assets and the income from his controversial book that states all the reasons why he believes three-year-old Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A in Praia da Luz back in May of 2007. Now, four-and-a-half years down the line, he faces another hurdle: a trial for defamation of the McCanns – due to start in Lisbon in February – in which the couple are claiming 1.2 million euros in damages. Does he think he can win? “Of course”, he says. This is the man whose maxim is “justice works in silence”. He still believes the case of the world’s most famous missing person will be solved. And he told Algarve123 what he thinks is needed to get there…

You wouldn’t miss him in a crowd. Gonçalo Amaral, 52, is strikingly tall with a penchant for hats. He was wearing a long black coat, a black fedora and a bright red scarf when we met him on the terrace of Casa Inglesa in Portimão. He looked much more like an intellectual than a former police officer, but these days his life is spent largely writing - an activity he’s come to love as much as the police work that used to fill his days.

Our first question: “How’s life?” elicited the reply “Bad!” so any further niceties went by the board.

What Amaral has always maintained is that the McCanns’ zeal for litigation “will not bring their daughter back”. He claims various legal suits against him, and a number of other Portuguese public figures who have verbalised “anti-McCann-story” sentiments, are totally out of keeping with the Catholic faith so fervently embraced by Madeleine’s mother Kate.

“Is it Catholic to hold sentiments of vengeance? To seek to destroy a family as mine has been destroyed?” he asks.

“This litigation will carry a heavy price – but I have faith that the mystery will be resolved. “Even if I “disappear” in the process - as Kate McCann has written that she wishes I would in her book - I have a daughter and lots of friends who will make sure justice is done”.

It may sound theatrical - but Amaral is not about theatre. He is about truth – hard facts, solid investigative work.

“The case has to be re-opened, and I have faith that it will be,” he said. “It will either be when this current “procurador” leaves, or when the current chief of police leaves. It’s not something I am pushing for - even if I could - it’s just something I feel certain will happen. And when it does, the first, most essential thing to be done will be a reconstruction of that very first night – the night Madeleine disappeared. Because that’s what happened: she literally disappeared! The reconstruction will have to involve all the parties: the McCanns and their friends. You see, there are so many inconsistencies in these people’s statements that a reconstruction will very quickly highlight where they have not told the truth”.

An example of the power of reconstructions came only weeks ago in Spain where a father claimed his two children were abducted from a park. A police reconstruction quickly proved that the father had never taken his children to the park: witnesses who had seen him arrive in his car but hadn’t noticed the children in the back seat, were surprised to discover that in the reconstruction the child-sized dummies in the back were clearly visible. The children’s father is now in jail – although the children are still missing.

Amaral explained that when Madeleine disappeared police didn’t organise a reconstruction in Praia da Luz “because there were so many journalists on the ground” – and once the heat had died down, “the McCanns refused. They said any reconstruction should be made by actors – but the whole reason for reconstructions is to use the people involved, and see where their stories don’t add up!”

Going back to that first night is logical: the initial 48-hours after any disappearance are crucial. They can literally mean the difference between life and death – but in Madeleine’s case, Amaral is convinced of the latter. The theory that has led to his prosecution by the McCanns for defamation is clearly set out in his book “A Verdade de Mentira” (The Truth of the Lie) – banned from sale in 2009, and then “released” by the Appeals Court a year later. We say “released” because the books were actually never returned to publishers Guerra & Paz, and thus they and Amaral have had nothing to sell…

“It’s another part of the whole plot to assassinate my civil position,” Amaral says matter-of-factly. “I’ve been left with no chances; no way of paying my debts; liens on my property. I’ve had to move away from my family in order to protect them. My marriage, well, it’s not so good. Not good at all, really. My life seems to be all about divorce…”

So how does he find the strength to move forwards?

“Well, I put the McCanns in a metaphorical box and I am not really thinking too much about the trial in February. I think I will win, and then they will appeal – but I have to have a path. I want to open another consultancy. I had one when I left the police force, but that was destroyed when the McCanns went after me over “A Verdade de Mentira”.

So that’s one thing - and the other is writing. I have recently brought out a new book: “Vidas sem Defesa” about missing children cases in Portugal, and I have another one almost ready (I am not going to tell you what it is about!). After that, I would like to take police “mysteries” and study them and write stories, not novels; stories based on facts to show what I believe really happened. There’s a real lack of books of this type.”

So he’s not angry over the agonies and frustrations he’s endured from what came from essentially doing his job?

“I have my anger well-guarded. No feelings for revenge. Like I say, they will pay for what they have done to me and my family – but through the courts. Even after everything that has happened, I still have faith in the Portuguese justice system”.

And does he have any clues as to what catapulted the Madeleine case into the stratosphere of media attention? Why did the McCanns receive so much help from the British authorities right from the very beginning? And why were they and the so-called Tapas 7 never taken to task for child neglect – considering that they all left their children alone at night during the ill-fated holiday?

“Ah, now there we’re getting into politics – and quite honestly, those are questions for the British public to ask. I don’t have to have theories about them. My job was to find Madeleine”.

A job handed to him nearly five years ago – and one that he will never forget. algarve123.com

Oh lovely Theresa Theresa May What Are You Getting Yourself Into?

2011-12-06T14:40:00.005Z

So Effectively The Portuguese Are Saying Scotland Yard's Investigation Is a Crock

Now there's a surprise for you. Whodathunkit?

Theresa May what Are you getting yourself into?

I did try to warn you!

Maddie: Attorney General's Office not part of new investigations
by Paula Oliveira
6 December 2011

The English police is investigating the disappearance of Maddie McCann without the assistance of Portuguese authorities. This information has been confirmed to TVI24 by the [Portuguese] Republic's Attorney General.

Three Scotland Yard investigators were in Barcelona between the 23rd and the 25th of November, following leads in the disappearance of the English child that disappeared from an apartment in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, in 2007. The presence of investigators in Spain may indicate that the child was taken across the border. But the Scotland Yard did not contact the Portuguese investigators.

The Scotland Yard did not have any contact with the Attorney General's Office about that issue. In the process, there is no knowledge of the existence of any new data/facts about Maddie's disappearance. The process will only be reopened under the regulations of article 279 of the Penal Process Code, which is to say, if any new elements appear that invalidate the basis for the archiving, the Attorney General's Office states in a written reply to TVI24.

The case was archived by the Attorney General's Office. Approximately one year ago, Pinto Monteiro [the Attorney General] asserted that he would only reopen it if new data appeared.

In May last year, the Scotland Yard reopened the process after the personal intervention of the United Kingdom's prime minister, David Cameron.

It is not known whether the British investigators have discovered any new fact that the Portuguese police failed to notice.

In August this year, the Scotland Yard confirmed to [Portuguese news] agency Lusa that they traveled to Portugal in order to discuss the Maddie case with Portuguese investigators. At that time, the Judiciary Police (PJ) and the Attorney General said they did not know about that information. Joana Morais

And as a by the by, I don't know who designed the building, but don't dogs normally have four legs?

The Harrowing of Kate McCann

2011-12-03T18:26:00.003Z

The harrowing of Kate McCann

Kate misses her chance to set the record straight in a book that adds little to an extensive canon, writes Eilis O'Hanlon
May 22 2011

Madeleine

Kate McCann

Bantam Press, €22.99

Why Kate? From the moment that their daughter vanished from a rented holiday apartment in Portugal's Praia da Luz resort, it was Gerry McCann who provided the public face of the campaign to bring Madeleine home. He was the one who dealt with reporters, set up websites, wrote a regular blog updating the search. If anyone was going to write a book about that time, it was surely Gerry who would've been expected to do it.

But it was always Kate who fascinated observers. Mothers are expected to behave in certain ways and Madeleine's didn't seem to be playing her role properly. She was criticised for being too cold, for not showing her emotions more. The public can be cruel juries. They want their pound of flesh. Four years on, with the fate of Madeleine still unknown, Kate has now stepped forward to tell her own story -- though her motive for doing so remains typically obstinate.

She may have kept a journal throughout the search, so that the couple's twins, Sean and Amelie -- and Madeleine too, if and when she returned to the family -- would know what happened during those terrible days, but the only reason it is being released to a wider audience now is to fund the continuing search for a missing child. "We are now the only people looking for her," as Kate notes poignantly, and that takes money. Whether it makes for much of a book is the difficulty.

It's hard to review this book with any objectivity, especially when it is such an extraordinarily controlled piece of writing. In many ways, the book suffers from the same shortcomings which led to Kate being vilified so horribly in certain quarters. She's clearly an intensely private person, for whom opening up does not come easily. Too often, there is a sense in these pages of holding back. There are some highly intimate details, for example about how she needed therapy to overcome her "revulsion" at sex after the abduction, and she writes with piercing intensity of her feelings of guilt, but it is as though these passing details are masking what is otherwise a psychological absence at the heart of the book.

After an initial preamble about her life before the holiday, the book settles down into a pedestrian chronological account of the public events that followed, peppered with asides about how she felt at certain moments.

The Tapas Nine are shadowy figures throughout; we never really get a sense of who they are. Goncalo Amaral, the Portuguese police chief who became such a thorn in the couple's side, is a peripheral presence. The night Madeleine went missing -- on which everything hinges -- is dealt with in just a few pages. The exact state of the room, and the comings and goings of the various characters in the tale, remains frustratingly vague.

This was Kate's best chance to set the record straight, but the book adds little to an already extensive canon. Time and again, her response to allegations against them is simply to reiterate what they said in statements at the time. It certainly won't change anyone's mind. Supporters of the couple will focus on the passages describing her harrowing grief and sense of guilt. Those who are suspicious will find further fuel in the dismissive and perfunctory way in which Kate answers some of the most serious allegations laid against the couple. When specially trained cadaver dogs, for example, detect the scent of death in the family's apartment, Kate is quick to highlight the unreliability of sniffer dogs. It makes absolute sense insofar as they know they didn't do anything to harm their beloved daughter.

But as a parent, surely you'd be terrified by what the dogs sensed? The fact that a strong indication of death had been found at the scene immediately raises the likelihood that something terrible happened to your daughter in that room; but Kate and Gerry are almost militant in their belief that their daughter is not dead. "Madeleine is alive until someone proves otherwise," she still insists. Maybe that's the only way you can carry on -- Kate does admit to having terrible visions intermittently of her daughter being abused and killed -- but the response still feels unsatisfactory

Perhaps that's just repeating the original error of wanting more from Kate McCann than she is willing or able to give. All too often she writes like a spectator to events, not a participant. Therapeutically, that may be a common reaction in people who have undergone traumatic experiences, but it makes for a weirdly detached and uninvolving book. It's almost as if Madeleine isn't the only one who went missing that night, but Kate as well. - Eilis O'Hanlon Independent ie

Woof Woof

2011-11-30T19:36:00.000Z

Courtesy of HiDeHo.

John Blacksmith: Leveson and the McCanns

2011-11-29T06:48:00.006Z

Part two of Appearances Can be Deceptive is now out, the whole thing making for a mighty read, mighty indeed.

Appearances can be deceptive, Part One

The Issue

The twin problem at the heart of the Madeleine McCann affair remains: almost everyone who investigates or studies the case in detail is troubled by the parents’ attitude to the truth. Yet, given their innocence of involvement in the disappearance of the child, what possible motive could they have for lying?

The parents are the only two people who saw, and bore witness to, the unmistakable evidence of intrusion into their apartment— the disturbed shutters which no three year old would have been capable of lifting from inside. Accept their word and abduction must have occurred.

Why don’t they believe us?

But from the beginning of the investigation the parents’ words failed to convince. The first officers on the scene, while not suspicious of the pair, were unable to share the self-evident certainty of an abduction that the parents, sometimes impatiently, sometimes hysterically, pressed on them. Both the written statements of the parents and their friends and the printed timeline which they offered to the police, a document in which weird and disturbing exactitude about the nine adults’ own movements was combined with a void about the child herself, created a sense of unease amongst the investigators. While the parents, as befitted their special role, were not immediately challenged, we now know that as early as May 10 the police had switched from suspicion to active disbelief of the group version of events, for Gerry McCann overheard Oldfield’s sobs in the face of shouted claims that he was lying. more

- - -

Appearances can be deceptive, Part Two
It’s a family affair

And so to the Leveson inquiry, which the McCanns, not having been hacked, have invited themselves into. It is primarily a show business affair and one’s main impression is that, with the exception of the Dowlers and their like, and leaving the McCanns aside for the moment, both sides are equally repulsive and deserve each other. Both are locked into a continuing private game: once the inquiry is finished, perhaps even before the comical denunciations are complete, the symbiotic relationships will resume, for showbiz can’t exist without cheap media to promote it, and the more down-market the celebrity the more down- market the promotional means required.

Perhaps another paper may close, some hackers will go to jail and the dredge end of the market will see abuses tightened up regarding the Dowlers and others. But the real action in the media crisis involves transparency between media groups and governments, the so-called “back door or front door at number 10?” question, and its resolution will involve serious negotiations between serious players—not the question of the “persecution” by the paparazzi of paunchy showbiz figures stumbling out of nightclubs at four in the morning, with coke still sticking to their nostrils.

What a gallery, what a procession of dreadful, gungy celebrities have been parading before the lawyers and the “lay assessors” alongside: Big breasts, big hair, big claims, big ego—and that was just Steve Coogan. more

Clicky

The McCanns Aren't Prostitutes They're Pimps

2011-11-28T11:38:00.005Z

The McCanns Whine To The Leveson Enquiry
Media Bastards
Sophia Botha
23/11/2011

This afternoon Gerry and Kate McCann whined to the Leveson Enquiry into media practices.

Gerry and Kate McCann were supposedly giving evidence to the Leveson Enquiry due to their supposed negative treatment from the press following the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.

I remember well the wall to wall media coverage in the summer of 2007 about the disappearance of 3 year old Madeleine whilst the McCann family were on holiday in Portugal, I remember well the media overkill their was about the disappearance of Madeleine; I remember in particular how Gerry and Kate McCann have attempted to manipulate the press (and us all via the press) into believing their story in regards to the disappearance. I remember that Gerry and Kate started to whine about their treatment from the press when the press started to ask hard questions of them because they started to suss that maybe the press were being sold a crock of shit.

Anytime probing questions of Gerry and Kate McCann’s story about the disappearance of their daughter, they start whining about how nasty the press are towards them etc. the news media are guilty of much but one thing they should be doing is asking questions of those who might just trying to bullshit us all. There definitely is a public interest argument in defence of the press treatment of Gerry and Kate McCann, because where maybe the Portuguese police failed to investigate or where they were unable to investigate the media might succeed in discovering whether Gerry and Kate could be guilty in the disappearance of their daughter.

The other day I was watching a documentary about the Joyce McKinney scandal, which was either about a woman saving her boyfriend from a religious cult or it was about a woman kidnapping a man she once had a fling with to have very kinky sex with. Joyce McKinney attempted to manipulate the press into believing her side of the story & that she was all wholesome and family values, but McKinney’s manipulation that she was all pure & holy kind of came unstuck when the Daily Mirror published on its front page a full blown picture of Joyce McKinney posing naked from when she worked as an adult model and prostitute. More The Bastard

McCanns: It's Not Mental Rape When We Do It

2011-11-18T12:30:00.003Z

In light of the latest lies emitting from the McCanns at the Leveson enquiry, I think it quite timely to re-up this post, Clarence Mitchell: A Blight On Humanity, from February 2010.

Clarence Mitchell: A Blight On Humanity

Madeleine is dead and the parents have, with the assistance of a person or persons unknown, disappeared her body.

It is some nine months later that the story of the McCanns unprecedented, uninvited and shameless intrusion into lives and grief of the Cortes family appears in the press.

By this same time, all but the simple and the foolish know that the child is dead, that includes numerous sections of the British Government and undoubtedly Leicestershire Constabulary.

It also includes in the know, Clarence Mitchell. A multitude of reasons apart, he wouldn't be there in the first place if the McCanns were innocent.

The McCanns have been made, and still are arguidos at this time.

Such then is the setting which surrounds this insidious tale.

Having had their shabby and shameless plans to use, the then still unknown fate of little Mari Luz, thwarted, what then is the response from team McCann and the piece of detritus that speaks for them?

It is not as you might imagine, a sincere apology for their transparent self serving efforts to give their own case some legitimacy by the crass and vulgar use of Mai Luz's image, no it anything but.

It is however, anything but what you can imagine, it is to attack, in all their grief and anguish, the parents of Mari Luz Cortes, attacked I might add with a degree of hypocrisy that is not only unheard of, but is immeasurable.

These utterly shameless words spewed out by this despicable creature are below, and these words cumulate in something so vile, so abhorrent, that they make one wonder just how base, just how wretched is the specimen that uttered them.

"How can someone be furious with another person for wanting to help to find the daughter?", said and outraged Mitchell.

Do the world a favour Mitchell, contract something terminal and die, but do make it something as painful as it is slow.

As a man and as a human being, your worth is nothing.

McCanns spokesman regrets the reaction of Juan Cortés and says that the couple only wanted to help

"It is shameful that Mari Luz's father presents complaints"

It is "surprising and shameful that Mari Luz's father presents complaints about us in a press release". This was the reaction of Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the McCanns when he was informed by the 24 Horas that the father of Juan Cortés does not authorise the distribution of the 18 thousand posters with the images of Maddie and the Spanish girl in Spain and Portugal.

"We regret the confusion. We only wanted to help Mari Luz's family and honestly we thought we had permission from the girl's father to this joint campaign", said Clarence Mitchell. The problem is that the 18 thousand posters were already sent by post, last Thursday to Spain. "Our only hope is that the owners of schools, restaurants and other public places are aware of the reaction of Mr. Juan Cortés and do not display the posters", said the spokesman of Kate and Gerry McCann.

"As I explained to you newspaper last Saturday, we did believe to have the permission of the Cortés family. Few days after the disappearance of Mari Luz, a Kate's friend that speaks Spanish contacted the father of the Spanish girl and told him about the intention of the McCanns in printing a poster of both children.

At that time Mari Luz's father said he would appreciate everything that the McCanns could do". Clarence Mitchell will now talk with Kate and Gerry about the situation and also with the volunteers that cooperated in the poster campaign. "How can someone be furious with another person for wanting to help to find the daughter?", said and outraged Mitchell. source Jona Morais

Leicester Police I Wish To Report Something Suspicious

2011-11-02T15:22:00.000Z

And a piece for your jigsaw no less.

Loathe as I am to quote the little bollocks; one only has to read the last sentence to appreciate why, however, on this occasion I make an exception, if only because the piece is current.

We have seen a few glib answers from Leicester police of late, but no so flippant, or as convenient as this. It's a Portuguese affair, now fuck off.

Madeleine McCann, you are forsaken.

Madeleine McCann - Who Cares.

I don't know why, but I'm still finding it impossible to get a straight
answer about Madeleine McCann from Leicestershire police.

I called to ask about Madeleine and almost before I'd asked the question was
being given the old brush off: "It's a Portuguese investigation, not ours."

The Portuguese authorities closed their investigation in July last year. The
press officer said she hadn't heard or read about that.

Apparently, the Leicstershire force still passes on any potential leads to
the dynamic Portuguese police who established precisely nothing about
Madeleine's disappearance during their 15-month inquiry.

I gave it 24 hours and called back. This time I was told that all the
Leicestershire cops involved in the Madeleine case were on half-term holiday. So
push off.

She didn't actually say that, but it felt like she had.

Still, onwards and upwards. The last time I asked a Leicestershire press
officer about Madeleine she got hysterical.

I hope that privately, at least, Madeleine's home force shows a bit more care
and thought towards her family. sky.com/lifeofcrime

Beware The Bogey Man The Disingenuous and The Back Door

2011-10-31T16:09:00.003Z

We witnessed it with the Patriot Act, although in the case of Bush, even that wasn't enough, Bushco and the American state going on to engage in all kinds of illegal domestic activities, from.... well you name it.

But what we did witness, was the wheeling out the terrorism bogey man and subsequently the enactment of the Patriot act, that did for privacy and civil rights in one fell swoop, what the Taliban did for cultural appreciation. Guardian, video below.

There is another bogey man I want to make mention of, and although not directly related to the main body of this post, it is important that I mention it for reasons manifold.

Voter disenfranchisement has been around in the US for long enough, but is seemingly ever on the increase in the red states of America. And shamelessly so I have to say; well it would be wouldn't it? Shame and Republican, being two words that don't belong in the same sentence.

I'm not going to explain the nuts and bolts of it all, but do Google it for yourselves. It's quite an eye-opener, even if you are somewhat au fait with the US voting system, even more so if you are not.

But it is under the guise of voter fraud, albeit so minuscule that it could, and should be ignored, nevertheless, this is the bogey man that Republican held states and districts offer, quite transparently and shamelessly, as the excuse to enact restrictions, usually in the form of voter ID, on that section of the public that would normally be associated with voting Democrat.

Update: The Guardian has a piece on this.

The Republican 'voter fraud' fraud

All over the US, GOP lawmakers have engineered schemes to make voting more difficult. Well, if you can't win elections fairly… Guardian

More recently and closer to home however, we have witnessed the use of, and not always for reasons noble, that most emotive of bogey men, the paedophile.

And what better example do we need of seeing the paedo bogey man being run out, and for sure without a noble reason in sight, than that of Jim Gamble, recently of the CEOP.

In chronological order I reference three previous posts, all featuring the use of emotive bogey man to further someone's agenda, an agenda I have to say, where the protection of children slips down the ladder of priorities. We only need to recall Jim Gambles attempts to whitewash the McCanns to have that observation confirmed.

The first up then: CEOP: More Toys Out Of The Pram Our bogey man, this time under the guise of cartoon porn, starts proper at the, A comment from the web mark. But please, don't miss out on the comments, they say as much, if not more than the article itself.

That's The Trouble With Hysteria follows next, and it is this post that is the meat and potatoes of it all. Referencing the toys out of the pram article at the outset, it delves a little deeper into the use of the bogey man as tool, but does moves on to cover one or two other points.

Now I know Why is pure Jim Gamble, well it is if you ignore, Ed Smart, Isabel Duarte and Keith Vaz. But for the main, it is Gamble, his methods and his empire building.

So to the article in question, two actually, there was something else that caught my eye on the same site.

Here again we see the same bogey man employed, he does get around doesn't he? But what this fellow is proposing, in the name of the bogey man of course, is nothing more than data gathering on a grand scale, and not least shall we say, a tad intrusive?

Details of all internet traffic should be logged, MEP says
A member of the European Parliament wants users' "traffic data", rather than the specific content of online communications, to be logged under expanded EU laws on data storage. This is according to a statement from the European People's Party (EPP) at the European Parliament.

Tiziano Motti, an Italian MEP, wants to extend the EU's Data Retention Directive "to content providers (social networks etc) in order to identify more easily those who commit crimes, including paedophilia through sexual harassment on the net," the EPP said.

"This is a request which does not refer specifically the online content, which falls under the Regulation of Wiretapping, but to the traffic data developed by the person uploading material of any kind on the net: comments, pictures, videos," it said.

The Data Retention Directive was established in 2006 to make it a requirement for telecoms companies to retain personal data for a period – determined by national governments – of between six months and two years. The Commission decided to regulate following terrorist attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005.

Under the Directive, telecoms firms are required to retain identifying details of phone calls and emails, such as the traffic and location, to help the police detect and investigate serious crimes. The details exclude the content of those communications.

Motti's proposals, developed with the help of Italian computer expert Fabio Ghioni (author of Hacker Republic), would involve the data being stored in an internet "black box" enabling the "truth of what happened on the web" to be recorded, according to an automated translation of a report on Ghioni's website (in Italian).

Ghioni's "Logbox" system would involve encrypting the traffic data and giving the "key" to access it to the user, an "authority" and a lawyer, according to an automated translation of a report (in Italian) by Italian Christian magazine, Famiglia Cristiana.

Ghioni said his "precise mechanism" would need the "collaboration" of operating system manufacturers such as Microsoft and Apple to log all activities on their systems, according to the automated translation of the report. That data would be "digitally signed in order to be traced to a specific computer and its user", allowing paedophiles to be identified "regardless of any trick [they may use] to anonymise any illegal activity", and would be inexpensive to operate, Ghioni said, according to the automated translation of the report.

Motti believes that establishing a system for storing "traffic data" would make it possible to enforce suggestions he previously made regarding data retention laws last year, according to the EPP.

In June 2010, the European Parliament backed proposals outlined in a "written declaration" by Motti and fellow MEP Anna Záborská to set up a system to act as an "early warning" system to identify paedophiles and other sex offenders. A written declaration has no legislative effect on its own, but is formally communicated by the Parliament to the European Commission in a bid to influence its policy if adopted.

The adopted declaration also called for the scope of the Directive to cover "data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks" and be extended "to search engines in order to tackle online child pornography and sex offending rapidly and effectively".

In April this year, the European Commission said it would update the Data Retention Directive after conceding that it does not always adequately protect privacy or personal data.

The Commission was responding to a critical report that it had commissioned to provide feedback on the impact the Directive was having on businesses and consumers, and how it was being implemented in EU countries.

At the time the Commission said that it would consider strengthening regulations of the storage, access to and use of retained data to improve the protection of personal data.

In May, UK Justice Secretary Ken Clarke said that the Commission's plans to revise the Directive should be viewed "with caution" after he listed examples of how stored communications data had been used to thwart terrorism and serious crime during a speech at the British Chamber of Commerce in Brussels. Out-Law.com

This is the other article that caught my eye, but don't be mislead by the header, it goes deeper than that.

YouTube asked to remove 135 videos over 'national security issues', Google says

The UK Government asked Google to remove 135 YouTube videos for national security reasons in the first half of this year, the internet search giant has said.

In total UK content removal requests increased by 71% compared to the previous six-month period, Google said in its twice-yearly transparency report.

The Government raised no national security concerns between July and December 2010.

Google fully or partially complied with 82% of the Government's requests, the report said.

In total the UK Government requested the removal of 333 items including web search results, images and videos according to the figures.

It also asked for 61 videos to be removed for 'privacy and security' reasons, three for violence and one for hate speech. 20 videos were removed for 'other' reasons, according to the figures.

Google started publishing its Transparency Report last year. It outlines traffic patterns and disruptions to Google services, as well as providing details of content removal requests and requests for user data received from governments around the world.

Removal requests ask for the removal of content from Google search results or another one of the company's products, including YouTube, it said. Data requests ask for information about Google user accounts or products.

The company said it received 1,273 user data requests relating to 1,443 individual users. It fully or partially complied with 64% of those requests, it said.

A Home Office spokesperson told Out-Law.com that where unlawful online content was hosted in the UK, the police have the power to seek its removal. Where the content is hosted overseas, the Government works with its international partners to have the content removed.

"The government takes the threat of online extremist or hate content very seriously," the spokesperson said.

National governments asked Google to remove content for many different reasons including defamation allegations and breaches of local laws prohibiting hate speech or pornography, it said.

Google said that it did not comply with government requests which were not specific enough for the company to know what should be removed, or allegations of defamation through informal letters from government agencies.

"We generally rely on courts to decide is a statement is defamatory according to local law," it said.

Brazil made the most content removal requests, the report said. China only made three removal requests, each covering a large amount of data. Google was unable to disclose the details of one of those requests as it "had reason to believe" the Chinese government had prohibited disclosure, it said.

The search engine received a request from police in the US to remove videos it was alleged depicted acts of police brutality, it revealed.

"We received a request from a local law enforcement agency to remove YouTube videos of police brutality, which we did not remove," it said.

"Separately, we received requests from a different local law enforcement agency for removal of videos allegedly defaming law enforcement officials. We did not comply with those requests, which we have categorised in this Report as defamation requests."

Content removal requests from authorities in the US increased by 70% compared to the previous six-month period, it said. In addition, the US authorities made more than 11,000 requests for user data - a higher figure than any other country, the report said. Out-Law.com

Leicestershire The Most Incredible Statement Made By A Police Force Ever!

2011-10-26T15:45:00.004+01:00

Have they learnt nothing from the resignation of John Yates, that casting the blind eye and ignoring the evidence, or the obvious, is only going to end in tears?

How on earth can a County Police Force come out with such a statement as this, is so totally and utterly beyond me.

Leicestershire Constabulary: A number of law enforcement agencies, including Leicestershire Constabulary, have a link to the 'Find Madeleine' website. Whilst we encourage anyone with information about Madeleine's whereabouts to contact the Portuguese police or their local police, we recognise the fact that some people may not feel comfortable in doing so. This link provides them with an alternative means of passing information.

The web site suggested by Leicester police, the one that the public might want to pass information to, is the one hosted by the two persons that were made Arguido, persons of interest, uncleared suspects, the last persons to see Madeleine McCann alive and statistically most likely to be involved the disappearance of the child. And yet Leicester police think it's quite acceptable for them to say: ''Don't phone us, phone the suspects!''

This transcends 'stuff you couldn't make up' to such a degree that I'm lost for words to describe it.

But it's not as though the circumstances surrounding the girl's disappearance are cut and dry; far from it, they are about as dodgy as they could be. And one doesn't have to be Sherlock Holmes, or even a cop for that matter, to know that these two should be sat in separate interview rooms giving answers to questions.

And the same applies to the Tapas lot. A three year old girl, Leicestershire resident and British subject I remind you, disappears off the face of the earth whilst in the care of her parents and surrounded by seven other adults, and nobody is curious enough to want to find out what happened to her?

And it is that lack of curiosity that speaks volumes, isn't it?

FOI Request

1/ Do the Leicestershire police agree with the McCann website that a man seen by a Mrs. G. Cooper probably abducted Madeleine?

2/ Is there any information that any particular man was "Madeleines probable abductor?"

3/ If so, why has this information never been released to the public?

4/ If not, how can they be helping the search for Madeleine by referring the public to a dishonest website that makes that claim?

5/ Are the Leicestershire police going to continue to aid a deception or are they either going to remove the website link or insist the McCanns remove the false statement?

Response – No information provided except for the following statement

A number of law enforcement agencies, including Leicestershire Constabulary, have a link to the 'Find Madeleine' website. Whilst we encourage anyone with information about Madeleine's whereabouts to contact the Portuguese police or their local police, we recognise the fact that some people may not feel comfortable in doing so. This link provides them with an alternative means of passing information.

We are unable to provide the information that you request concerning the number of complaints regarding the website link.

What must be borne in mind is that at the heart of this tragic case is an innocent little girl who went missing in May 2007. Our focus has, and will always be, to do everything we can to assist our Portuguese colleagues who lead the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. I would hope that you will support us in this.

And the last paragraph! it is beneath contempt.

This is just a tiny part of Freedom Of Information requests, the majority being denied, directed at Leicestershire Constabulary. More here whatdotheyknow.com

This is not the first time that I have said a few words on the subject. Let me re-up a comment of mine from a previous post. And I remind you it is from the comments section.

Evenin' all.

Yes the manuals, courtesy of whom I wonder, a corrupt CEOP or the corrupt Leicester plod? Takes your pick.

As you say, apart from not wanting to be in the same room as the wee shite, I don't think I would trust myself to be so.

Regarding your two choices of thought, it has to be the former because quite frankly he's had enough fuckin' rope to rig the Cuttty Sark and still have enough left over for a bondage session.

We must never even think of considering that the wee man and the position he finds himself in today is by one of chance.

The position he finds himself in is due to one thing only, corruption. I don't know how high up it starts, nor do I know at what level it finishes, but what I do know is Leicester plod is smack bang in the middle of it.

I get tired of drawing the same conclusion, LP are either so fucking stupid that they can't see what's going on, or they're so fucking bent they don't want to see what's going on.

It's why, unless some private enterprise nails them with irrefutable evidence, that I think they will get away with it.

Can you imagine what the LP and this case would look like to an outside police force? stroll on! they'd take one look at Leicester plod and say, are you so fucking stupid that you can't see what's going on, or are you so fucking bent you don't want to see what's going on.

But that, judging by what has come to pass so far, ain't going to happen.

Drive on McCanns, no matter that you've fucked your daughter into a hole somewhere, taken the piss out of everything and everybody, Leicester fucking plod will continue to ignore what must be apparent to five year old, just as they will continue to sit on their fat corrupt fucking arses and carry on in the manner that which they have become accustomed, the one they have so clearly demonstrated, past and present.

From this post: Uncleared Suspect in Simulating a Crime and Hiding a Cadaver to be Guest Speaker at CEOP Conference on Child Abduction link

Something else from a previous post.

Footnote: It's not an impossible scenario to imagine, although a lot less likely, (and even less likely knowing the parents) although a lot less likely because of the age of the child involved, but I have taken other people's kids on on foreign holidays. And anybody who has ever had kids of their own will know why, Daaaad, Muuum, I'm bored.

But had for instance the McCanns taken one of our Matty's sprogs, or our Stu's kids abroad, and one of them was "abducted." I can't help but ask myself, would 'because Gerry McCann says the kid was abducted' be good enough for any of these parents and upholders of the law?

Answers on a postcard please.

Home Secretary Perhaps You Might Care To Review This: Re-Up

2011-10-26T14:19:00.004+01:00

In light of me writing these few lines only a day or two ago, I can do no better than to re-post this article from August 2010. As ever, there is nothing in the article that hasn't been freely available to Leicestershire Constabulary and the Metropolitan Police.

Let us forget now for a moment, all that has preceded a quite recent event, the 'Review' by the Metropolitan Police. Because it is from a British perspective that the whole thing reads like a bad play at best.

The governing power of the United Kingdom has undertaken to review the files at the behest of the two people who are to this day, the only persons of interest regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

You simply just could not make it up, no matter how hard you tried.

And if anyone is expecting something positive out of this review, don't, it isn't going to happen.

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?

I am far from alone in feeling displeasure about the performance of Ms Smith as Home Secretary, and it is not the claiming of, as her main residence, the spare bedroom in her sister's semi, no not that at all. It is rather Ms Smith's rather anomalous behaviour when charged with the duties of high office.

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 Arguidos by 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?

Similarly, I have in the past asked pretty much the same question.
Jim Gamble CEOP a question if I may.

Imagine

2011-10-22T08:21:00.012+01:00

I am posting the few lines below, just as I found them.

If it was the writers intention, and I'm pretty sure it was, it is the last sentence of the article that is the essence of the post.

It screams, well to me it does. Just who, and how many, were involved in directing the judge to grant an injunction prohibiting the sale of Goncalo Amaral's book, A Verdade de Mentira?

Books simply do not get banned in a European democracy in the twenty first century.

They simply don't. And they don't get banned for the unbelievably pathetic reasons the MCCanns proffered.

As equally, the government of a country, does not treat, or allow to be treated, by itself or by the scum of Europe, one of its Nationals in a manner described in the article, and that can only be described as appalling, Not if it has an ounce of pride it doesn't.

And not when they know in their heart of hearts, that the fellow was right.

Let us forget now for a moment, all that has preceded a quite recent event, the 'Review' by the Metropolitan Police. Because it is from a British perspective that the whole thing reads like a bad play. The governing power of the United Kingdom has undertaken to review the files at the behest of the two people who are to this day, the only persons of interest regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

You simply just could not make it up, no matter how hard you tried.

And if anyone is expecting something positive out of this review, don't, it isn't going to happen.

I've just found this on Joana Morais' site, I've never seen this before but it makes interesting reading especially with the Court Case looming, if Gerry and Kate read this forum, I would be very worried if I were them.......

by Aníbal Ferreira
22nd Jan 2010.

Imagine you had been a police officer for 30 years and that you were investigating the disappearance of a little English girl named Maddie McCann.

Imagine that all the police officers, including you, concluded that the little girl had died and that the parents were suspects of being involved in concealing the body.

Imagine that the little girl’s parents were made official suspects and that the English press started to call you “bungling cop”, “amateur”, “corrupted”, “inept”, “incompetent” and “failure”.

Imagine that the English press started to announce on a daily basis that you had “manufactured the case”, “made stuff up”, “”ditched vital evidence”, “hampered the investigation”, that you were “biased”, “cruel” and “lying”.

Imagine that for month after month, the English press called you “fat”, “drunk”, “torturer”, “stupid”, “imbecile” and “infamous”, repeating 418 times that you were a “disgraced” man and that the mother of your children was a “prostitute”.

Imagine that the police’s political directory did not defend you and that, quite to the contrary, it took the case investigation away from you, allowing for the English press to print the headline “Sacked!” and to renew all previous attacks with increased violence.

Imagine that the Public Ministry declared that the process would wait for the production of better evidence and that said statement was understood in England as an “acquittal” of the little girl’s parents, prompting even more attacks from the press against the “bungling cop”, “amateur” and “corrupt”, who “manufactured the case”, “made stuff up” and “ditched vital evidence”.

Have you imagined all of this? Well, then answer this question: IF YOU COULD WRITE A BOOK TO DEFEND YOUR REPUTATION, WOULD YOU WRITE IT?

Now imagine that the book was taken off the market because it damaged the little girl’s parents’ reputation

Yes imagine, and imagine what he must have been thinking. The sum of two plus two equals four.

h/t Lillyofthevalley

This is not the first post where I have made use of the word Imagine.

Reactions Are Somewhat Telling Aren't They?

2011-10-20T17:00:00.004+01:00

Well! whose door am I going to lay this at? I have slagged off Twitter, having likened it to being poked periodically with a sharp stick. What was it that I said a few days ago, this I think?

But it's that damn Twitter thing, it's almost as if someone is poking me every couple of minutes with a sharp stick and saying, what about this then, you remember this bit dontcha? And that's the trouble, I do, and unfortunately, all too well.

Yes quite.

But it would be unfair to single out Twitter for this very reluctant part time return to blog about injustice. Injustice personified by a slithering visage of the globules of evil that shape themselves into a vaguely human forms every now and again, the Doctors McCann.

And part time it will be, I must stress, for who would want to give their undivided attention to two bowls of discharge, who fuck for money but refuse to call themselves whores. To a couple so odious, that they make a living out of their dead child, and refuse equally to call themselves pimps.

No, it's like cleaning the bog I suppose, and just as attractive, something that must be done out of necessity, but not something you would want to do every day.

But Twitter becomes quite incidental after what we have all witnessed recently, the shameless face of corruption that masquerades as law enforcement here in these British Isles. It too flaunting itself as shamelessly as any desperate crack addicted street whore, all too wiling to fall to its knees and suck ageing, wrinkled, flaccid cock, providing the price is right. To say nothing of those among us that adopt the position, and just as eagerly go down on that same distasteful, shrivelled appendage, and do so free of charge. Free to them of course, but not so for us plebs, who ultimately pay the price for these parliamentary promiscuities.

No, justice and the the stalwart defenders of the law in this shabby country, are like justice itself, such rare animals, bordering on extinction, save perhaps for the odd one of its species, tucked away in some forgotten backwater.

What a sad state of affairs then, that is the status quo, where one has no recourse in seeking justice in the slightest. Where exists, from the very top to the very bottom of law enforcement and Parliament alike, such a degree of corruption as to be the envy of any third world banana republic. What an accolade!

So what is the answer? I wish I knew, but I know it does me no good as a person, to simply rail against injustice if I'm not prepared to speak out and be counted on the issue. As oppression can only survive through silence, much the same can be said of injustice.

And the third factor in my reluctant return, not something blameworthy, more a catalyst, and a very simple one at that, courtesy, I have to add, of the dreaded Twitter. This pertaining to another missing white girl, and lost on nobody, is why there is such an incredible interest in the McCannesque style disappearance of the infant. Neither I'm sure is it lost upon the McCanns, who if they don't have justice to look forward to, they can look forward to the same spotlight being refocussed on them every time a child disappears under similar circumstances. Understandably so.

I would have paid to see their reaction to the hoax sighting last night, I'm sure it was very telling!

Yes reactions are somewhat telling aren't they?

Which prompted me, in the middle of the night I might add, to scour Youtube, all be it to no avail, for a fifteen second clip. No harm done, I did come across the desired footage, in still a short clip, only this one includes Kate McCann's now iconic few seconds of squirming as she confesses, for all intents and purposes, two things. That she didn't 'physically search for Madeleine' and that she didn't do so, because there was no point. And if anybody doesn't see it that way, Scotland Yard included, then I have a bridge I want to sell you.

The moment is brief, but I hammered the capture key, and the result is below. If you think, why so many, it is only because experience has taught me to go with everything, because once you start to try and edit stuff out, it ends up quite simply, a mess. Not only that, it does give a better feel for the moment.

The key then to all this, the McCann's reaction to this question. (full transcript)

Amanda Walker: Just take us through the emotional experience that you go through from the moment that someone says 'I'm definite I've seen Madeleine' to when it's discounted.

I remind you, not that I have to, this and all other such material has been freely available on the net, to the public, successive governments, and law enforcement alike, for years.

It was only the other day that Ian Puddick informed us of the priorities of the new head of the Metropolitan Police, Bernard Hogan-Howe. Visit Ian Puddick's webpage, and he will inform you of one or two other things as well.

Unedited

You couldn't make it up.

Not for the first time have I used stills from this interview, as you will see below. I had to cut the original in half in order for it to be read, reminding you that the main body of the text is a special report by yours truly on a Sun spectacular non-story, the Raymond Hewlett letter that never was

The Appalling Vista - The Fight Back Against Operation Ore - Chapters 1-6

2011-04-27T12:53:00.011+01:00

Moved here.

Dignity

2010-12-31T19:00:00.005Z

Gonçalo Amaral: I haven't lost my dignity.

For a year, he was silent due to the injunction that had been filed against him by the McCann couple, for all copies of ‘Maddie – The Truth of the Lie’ to be taken off the shelves in bookshops. Nonetheless, he never gave up and appealed to the Appeals Court, which in October overturned the prohibition to sell the book and the video that was produced from a TVI documentary, because “it does not offend the McCanns’ fundamental rights”, further stating that Gonçalo Amaral’s freedom of expression is protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. At the time, the English couple also demanded compensation in the amount of 1.2 million euro, over statements that they consider to be libellous. For the former PJ coordinator and his wife, Sofia Leal, those were months of suffocation that forced them to make some changes, namely to perform cuts to their family budget, in the education of their daughters, who left the school where they were studying due to the financial difficulties that the couple faces.

“The exile that I was subject to is coming to an end, I have not lost my dignity or my integrity and I feel strong enough to intervene, in a more active way, in the search for truth and in the performance of justice”, Gonçalo clarifies, adding that this was a complicated year. “It wasn’t easy, actually nothing has been easy since I retired from the Judiciary Police and decided, at my own cost and risk, to affront instituted powers within the search for the truth”, he mentions. “The seizing of assets remains unsolved because it took place outside of the injunction. The losses, financial and others, have yet to be counted, there has been extensive damage, but we continue to believe in justice. We have been living with the support of family and friends, who have never abandoned us”, reveals the former police officer, who resides in a rented apartment in Portimão with his wife, his daughters and the cat, Bolachinha [Cookie].

Gonçalo Amaral and Sofia Leal defend a family Christmas and insist on keeping the tradition of the ‘Presépio do Menino ao Alto’ [Nativity of the Child on the Height] alive, which dates back to the Middle Ages. “In the Algarve, it’s he who brings the presents and it’s to the Child that children pray every day of the year. On the 8th of December, the day of ‘Nossa Senhora da Conceição’ [Our Lady of Conception], the ‘searinhas’ [little corn fields] or ‘cabeleiras’ [wigs] are sown. Those are wheat seeds, which are placed in small containers, under the bed, where it’s dark and warm. Nine days before Christmas, a chest of drawers is ‘dressed’ with the finest needlework that one owns and a stepped throne is built. Then, the ‘cabeleiras’ are placed, symbols of abundance, as well as the oranges and the pomegranates. Finally, Baby Jesus is placed on top of the throne. It’s a very emotional moment, where the family all comes together. While my father says the prayers, my mother and I finish arranging the throne, the girls place the fruits and in the end Gonçalo places Baby Jesus. On the Kings’ Day, we take the ‘cabeleiras’ into the field and sow them into the earth. That’s the Algarve’s mixture of the sacred and the profane. We also build the common Nativity, as it was created by St. Francis of Assisi, but with a very Portuguese touch: with clay figures that are placed on a base of cork and moss, with water streams, fountains, sheep and a little rock”, the wife of the former PJ coordinator explains.

Four Freedoms Norman Rockwell - Freedom of Speech

The season has almost always the same taste to the Amaral family. “Christmas Eve supper and Christmas Day lunch are the most important meals in the year. Therefore, on the 1st of December, the women in the family gather to decide on the menu, the dinnerware, the linen, the details…”, she says, adding that they spend Christmas in Portimão with her parents, her sister, her brother-in-law and the neighbours.

In a conversation with ‘Nova Gente’, Gonçalo said that the McCanns continue to attack him: “What they are trying to do to me is not only to limit my civic and constitutional rights. They try my civil assassination, to destroy my life, not allowing the exercise of any licit activity, or for me to comply with the existing compromises and those of my family”, he explains, stressing that “while limiting my freedom of expression, they have destroyed the firm that I had created, they tried to forbid my access to the Lawyers’ Orders’ stay, and they have seized assets and income sources”, he says, justifying that everything was done “under the banner of searching for a mysteriously disappeared child, who is probably dead – as the Public Ministry says -, people and their relatives are being destroyed. One has to say that this is not catholic at all, coming from people who say they are so religious and pious. This is not how they will find the child!”

Gonçalo Amaral says that he will wait to read the book that the McCanns are writing. “It’s being said that the book is an aid to find their daughter. As it will only be published towards the end of April, we can conclude that until then, their daughter won’t be found.”

Gonçalo Amaral

The Dignity of NHS Doctors McCann

This is the last post. I shall still blog non-McCann related material at Only in America.
I have another blog evolving, it is called, Diary of a Mad Person, but, unlike the Earth, blogs take a tad longer than six days to create.

Tony Bennett

2010-12-31T18:50:00.013Z

In this penultimate post, prior to relinquishing control of my McCann related blogs, I shall in the main address two issues, propriety and veracity.

Propriety or suitability if you will. A recent comment made by myself in regard to the suitability, actions, and it must be said, judgement, of Tony Bennett seems to have sent my once loyal supporters scurrying away in packs, not droves I add.

And the cause of this exodus? with Bennett, and a little imagination, leading his flock Moses-like out of Egypt and delivering them unto the land of Canaan, aka the Madeleine Foundation. The cause of this exodus then, these few words.

Hey you, shouter; I don't know what you're screaming for, he's the best asset you've got.

I've just watched the fucker on BBC East Midlands, the man is a fucking liability to our cause, an absolute fucking liability if ever the were, and it's time one or two others woke up to the fact.

A self serving barmpot with as much sense of judgement as a blind lemming.

East Midlands Today! "I think I will let a outfit called East Midlands Today do a program on me, it's sure to be fair and balanced."

Yeah right, just like Fox News is fair and balanced.

Fucking stroll on! will y'all wake up and smell the goddamned coffee.

Asset my arse.

Seems reasonable enough, at least I haven't called him a serial loser and a liar, well not yet. Nor for that matter, have I called him a homophobic racist arrogant religious nutter, which of course he is.

Judgement

Now I'm not alone in this opinion, there is this fellow, and having borrowed such a delightful term of phrase as "serial loser," I thought I might borrow the relative passage from which it was sourced. This by the by, is incidental to what I have to say here.

Their main target of opportunity is a social worker named Tony Bennett, an espouser of various fringe causes such as “death to metrication”. Bennett is an ideal target – anti-McCann, loud and self-righteous, an effective, if weird, self-publicist (he can be seen sitting owlishly behind McCann and the Coffin in the House of Commons hearings) and, most importantly, a serial loser who looks like he fell out of Monty Python.

As I say this is just an aside, but not so the next writer, what he has to say, and Bennett's response, is the crux of the matter.

It surprises me little that Bennett felt the need to respond to an article written by *TTW4, though in hindsight I'm sure he will rue the day he did so. Or to be more accurate, the manner in which he responded. (*Then there were four)

Had Bennett chosen to ignore the article by TTW4, a far wiser choice given the content. I cannot help but wonder how many of those that read the thing, took the trouble to understand it or realise its import. Because to read, line by line what TTW4 argues, certainly as far as I'm concerned, leaves little room for counter-argument. Its a good opinion and its pretty near spot on.

Perhaps it is for this reason, that he had no counter, that Bennett attacked the article in the bizarre manner that did. Let us look then at the offending article. Compiled from screenshots and presented as a jpeg, the article, highlighted in blue, sandwiched by those of Bennett in green.

Which in a slightly longer and in a somewhat more elegant manner, does much to endorse my original comment. The Carter-Ruck reference I will address down the page. So now to matters more serious.

'thentherewere4' = 'himself'

TTW4 and 'Himself' are one and the same.

Do you not recognise the style?

And 'Good Quality Wristbands' as well.

What is it about these four lines that makes them so important? Quite simply, they are lies, but they are not simple lies, they are not lies told in passing, they are constructed lies and constructed for a purpose.

Whatever that purpose be, is beyond my ken. What is not in doubt is that they were deliberately and knowingly constructed by Tony Bennett for purposes of his own. How can I be so sure of that, read on?

An email from TTW4 to myself in response to Bennett's post.

To which I can only add. If the man is prepared to lie so deliberately over an issue like this, what else is he prepared to lie about? Or perhaps more the point, what else has he lied about?

Tony Bennett is a Young Earth Creationist, as such his whole life is a lie. He cannot defend the bizarre and ridiculous dogma of Creationism without constantly having to lie in his attempts to defend the indefensible.

Thou shall not bear false witness against your neighbour. Number nine on the list was it?

Fan

Regarding the Carter-Ruck thing, I think I will leave it, but it was much to do with effectiveness of the man once he refused the first hurdle. Think of Carter-Ruck in terms of the cartoon below, and of course not least, the genesis of all this, TTW4s opinion piece.
I will leave one or two other things as well, there is enough here as it stands.

I'm undecided whether this post remains on a permanent basis or not. It's not the kind of thing I want to bow out on after three years, but it certainly stays for today.

It stays.

John Pilger: The War You Don't See (And The Truth You Never Heard)

2010-12-25T11:06:00.009Z

Pilger takes a look at the role played by the media in the selling, and the maintaining of, the Bush/Blair war of aggression in Iraq. (and others)

The first clip is out of sinc, but sinc, as does content and revelations, improves greatly after that.

H/T Joana Morais.

Political Pressure, Whodathunkit?

2010-12-24T00:06:00.008Z

Which kind of endorses the adage, no matter who you vote for, it's always the government that gets in.

What happened to all that hope people invested in you Mister President?

But not for one minute would I have expected anything different. If successive administrations prosecuted the previous one for crimes against humanity, by gum there'd be a lot of folk in gaol.

Obama and GOPers Worked Together to Kill Bush Torture Probe

A WikiLeaks cable shows that when Spain considered a criminal case against ex-Bush officials, the Obama White House and Republicans got really bipartisan.
By David Corn

Wed Dec. 1, 2010 2:47 PM PST

In its first months in office, the Obama administration sought to protect Bush administration officials facing criminal investigation overseas for their involvement in establishing policies the that governed interrogations of detained terrorist suspects. A "confidential" April 17, 2009, cable sent from the US embassy in Madrid to the State Department—one of the 251,287 cables obtained by WikiLeaks—details how the Obama administration, working with Republicans, leaned on Spain to derail this potential prosecution.

The previous month, a Spanish human rights group called the Association for the Dignity of Spanish Prisoners had requested that Spain's National Court indict six former Bush officials for, as the cable describes it, "creating a legal framework that allegedly permitted torture." The six were former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales; David Addington, former chief of staff and legal adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney; William Haynes, the Pentagon's former general counsel; Douglas Feith, former undersecretary of defense for policy; Jay Bybee, former head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel; and John Yoo, a former official in the Office of Legal Counsel. The human rights group contended that Spain had a duty to open an investigation under the nation's "universal jurisdiction" law, which permits its legal system to prosecute overseas human rights crimes involving Spanish citizens and residents. Five Guantanamo detainees, the group maintained, fit that criteria.

Soon after the request was made, the US embassy in Madrid began tracking the matter. On April 1, embassy officials spoke with chief prosecutor Javier Zaragoza, who indicated that he was not pleased to have been handed this case, but he believed that the complaint appeared to be well-documented and he'd have to pursue it. Around that time, the acting deputy chief of the US embassy talked to the chief of staff for Spain's foreign minister and a senior official in the Spanish Ministry of Justice to convey, as the cable says, "that this was a very serious matter for the USG." The two Spaniards "expressed their concern at the case but stressed the independence of the Spanish judiciary."

Two weeks later, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and the embassy's charge d'affaires "raised the issue" with another official at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The next day, Zaragoza informed the US embassy that the complaint might not be legally sound. He noted he would ask Cándido Conde-Pumpido, Spain's attorney general, to review whether Spain had jurisdiction.

On April 15, Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.), who'd recently been chairman of the Republican Party, and the US embassy's charge d'affaires met with the acting Spanish foreign minister, Angel Lossada. The Americans, according to this cable, "underscored that the prosecutions would not be understood or accepted in the US and would have an enormous impact on the bilateral relationship" between Spain and the United States. Here was a former head of the GOP and a representative of a new Democratic administration (headed by a president who had decried the Bush-Cheney administration's use of torture) jointly applying pressure on Spain to kill the investigation of the former Bush officials. Lossada replied that the independence of the Spanish judiciary had to be respected, but he added that the government would send a message to the attorney general that it did not favor prosecuting this case.

The next day, April 16, 2009, Attorney General Conde-Pumpido publicly declared that he would not support the criminal complaint, calling it "fraudulent" and political. If the Bush officials had acted criminally, he said, then a case should be filed in the United States. On April 17, the prosecutors of the National Court filed a report asking that complaint be discontinued. In the April 17 cable, the American embassy in Madrid claimed some credit for Conde-Pumpido's opposition, noting that "Conde-Pumpido's public announcement follows outreach to [Government of Spain] officials to raise USG deep concerns on the implications of this case."

Still, this did not end the matter.......more

Words From The Grave: Aldous Huxley

2010-12-18T15:05:00.009Z

It would be a rare day indeed when something comes along, the significance of which makes me watch the thing over, and back to back at that.

This 1958 interview between Mike Wallace and Aldous Huxley is one of those rare things.

I honestly don't know which I would find the most frightening; listening to Huxley's near oracle like predictions as a contemporary, or, as I sit now, with the luxury of hindsight, half a century later.

The number and the accuracy of Huxley's talking points, given that same luxury of the aforementioned hindsight, is quite remarkable and not least a testament to the man's foresight and intellect.

Given where we sit today, in the shadow of the concerted attacks by disproportionate forces against one man, Julian Assage, makes the interview all the more compelling.

From over-population to propaganda, from technology, its growth and use, to controlling people by administered drugs, * to the carnival surrounding the election of personalities rather than policies, Huxley covers them all.

As an aside, Mike Wallace was the father of despicable Republican shill, Chris Wallace.

*I wanted to mention this, but I've never had an appropriate vehicle to do so since discovering some fresh data.

I had written previously about the quality of evidence extracted from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed under torture, but what I never knew until very recently was the amount of times that the man subjected to being water-boarded. It amounts to a staggering one hundred and eighty three times.

Now a spook or an inquisitor I ain't, but a hundred and eighty three times! what's with this lot, ain't they got no bleedin' television in Guantanamo Bay?

John Pilger: Protect Assange, Don’t Abuse Him

2010-12-18T03:19:00.004Z

Update. Amy Goodman talks to John Pilger. I think the details that Goodman gives out about the US attempts to try and stop everyone and their mother reading the leaks actually betters what Pilger has to say. Well it is if you have a penchant for high farce.

Protect Assange, Don’t Abuse Him
By John Pilger

Forty years ago, a book entitled The Greening of America caused a sensation. On the cover were these words: "There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual." I was a correspondent in the United States at the time and recall the overnight elevation to guru status of the author, a young Yale academic, Charles Reich. His message was that political action had failed and only "culture" and introspection could change the world. This merged with an insidious corporate public relations campaign aimed at reclaiming western capitalism from the sense of freedom inspired by the civil rights and anti-war movements. The new propaganda's euphemisms were postmodernism, consumerism and "me-ism".

The self was now the zeitgeist. Driven by the forces of profit and the media, the search for individual consciousness all but overwhelmed the spirit of social justice and internationalism. A new deity was proclaimed; the personal was the political.

In 1995, Reich published Opposing the System, in which he recanted almost everything in The Greening of America. "There will be no relief from either economic insecurity or human breakdown," he now wrote, "until we recognize that uncontrolled economic forces create conflict, not well-being . . ." There were no queues in the bookstores this time. In the age of economic neoliberalism, Reich was out of step with the rampant individualism of the west's new political and cultural elite.

False Tribunes

The revival of militarism in the west and the search for a new "threat" following the end of the cold war depended on the political disorientation of those who, 20 years earlier, would have formed a vehement opposition. On 11 September 2001, they were silenced finally, and many were co-opted into the "war on terror". The invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 was supported by leading feminists, especially in the US, where Hillary Clinton and other false tribunes of feminism made the Taliban's treatment of Afghan women the rationale for attacking a stricken country and causing the deaths of at least 20,000 people while giving the Taliban new life. That the warlords backed by America were as medievalist as the Taliban was not allowed to interrupt such a right-on cause. The zeitgeist, the years of "personal" depoliticizing and distracting true radicalism, had worked. Nine years later, the disaster that is Afghanistan is the consequence.

It seems the lesson must be learned all over again as a group of media feminists joins the assault on Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, or the "Wikiblokesphere", as Libby Brooks abuses it in the Guardian. From the Times to the New Statesman, apparent feminist credence is given to the chaotic, incompetent and contradictory accusations against Assange in Sweden.

On 9 December, the Guardian published a long, supine interview by Amelia Gentleman with Claes Borgström, the "highly respected Swedish lawyer". In fact, Borgström is foremost a politician, a powerful member of the Social Democratic Party. He intervened in the Assange case only when the senior prosecutor in Stockholm dismissed the "rape" allegation as based on "no evidence". In Gentleman's Guardian article, an anonymous source whispers to us that Assange's "behaviour towards women . . . was going to get him into trouble". This smear was taken up by Brooks in the paper that same day. Ken Loach and I and others on "the left" are "shoulder to shoulder" with the misogynists and "conspiracy theorists". To hell with journalistic inquiry. Ignorance and prejudice rule.

The Australian barrister James Catlin, who acted for Assange in October, says that both women in the case told prosecutors that they consented to have sex with Assange. Following the "crime", one of the women threw a party in honour of Assange. When Borgström was asked why he was representing the women, as both denied rape, he said: "Yes, but they are not lawyers." Catlin describes the Swedish justice system as "a laughing stock". For three months, Assange and his lawyers have pleaded with the Swedish authorities to let them see the prosecution case. This was denied until 18 November, when the first official document arrived - in the Swedish language, contrary to European law.

Unveiled Threat

Assange still has not been charged with anything. He has never been a "fugitive". He sought and got permission to leave Sweden, and the British police have known his whereabouts since his arrival in this country. This did not stop a London magistrate on 7 December ignoring seven sureties and sending him to solitary confinement in Wandsworth Prison.

At every turn, Assange's basic human rights have been breached. The cowardly Australian government, which is legally obliged to support its citizen, has made a veiled threat to take away his passport. In her public remarks, the prime minister, Julia Gillard, has shamefully torn up the presumption of innocence that underpins Australian law. The Australian minister for foreign affairs ought to have called in both the Swedish and the US ambassadors to warn them against any abuse of human rights against Assange, such as the crime of incitement to murder.

In contrast, vast numbers of decent people all over the world have rallied to Assange's support: people who are neither misogynists nor "internet attack dogs", to quote Libby Brooks, and who support a very different set of values from those espoused by Charles Reich. They include many distinguished feminists, such as Naomi Klein, who wrote: "Rape is being used in the Assange prosecution in the same way that women's freedom was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up!" source Truthout

It's The Hypocrisy See - Michael Moore: Dear Government of Sweden

2010-12-17T17:34:00.008Z

If only, there are far darker forces at play here than a bit of cant.

But it is Michael Moore that highlights Sweden's normal laissez-faire attitude regarding rape in that country, reflecting in some pretty abysmal sex crime statistics in doing so.

Not unsurprisingly, Moore takes these statistics, gives them a wave in the air, and asks the same question as many of us do. What's going on?

Dear Government of Sweden

Dear Swedish Government:

Hi there -- or as you all say, Hallå! You know, all of us here in the U.S. love your country. Your Volvos, your meatballs, your hard-to-put-together furniture -- we can't get enough!

There's just one thing that bothers me -- why has Amnesty International, in a special report, (PDF) declared that Sweden refuses to deal with the very real tragedy of rape? In fact, they say that all over Scandinavia, including in your country, rapists "enjoy impunity." And the United Nations, the EU and Swedish human rights groups have come to the same conclusion: Sweden just doesn't take sexual assault against women seriously. How else do you explain these statistics from Katrin Axelsson of Women Against Rape:

- Sweden has the HIGHEST per capita number of reported rapes in Europe.

- This number of rapes has quadrupled in the last 20 years.

- The conviction rates? They have steadily DECREASED.

Axelsson says: "On April 23rd of this year, Carina Hägg and Nalin Pekgul (respectively MP and chairwoman of Social Democratic Women in Sweden) wrote in the Göteborgs [newspaper] that 'up to 90% of all reported rapes [in Sweden] never get to court.'"

Let me say that again: nine out of ten times, when women report they have been raped, you never even bother to start legal proceedings. No wonder that, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, it is now statistically more likely that someone in Sweden will be sexually assaulted than that they will be robbed.

Message to rapists? Sweden loves you!

So imagine our surprise when all of a sudden you decided to go after one Julian Assange on sexual assault charges. Well, sort of: first you charged him. Then after investigating it, you dropped the most serious charges and rescinded the arrest warrant.

Then a conservative MP put pressure on you and, lo and behold, you did a 180 and reopened the Assange investigation. Except you still didn't charge him with anything. You just wanted him for "questioning." So you -- you who have sat by and let thousands of Swedish women be raped while letting their rapists go scott-free -- you decided it was now time to crack down on one man -- the one man the American government wants arrested, jailed or (depending on which politician or pundit you listen to) executed. You just happened to go after him, on one possible "count of unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation and one count of rape (third degree)." And while thousands of Swedish rapists roam free, you instigated a huge international manhunt on Interpol for this Julian Assange!

What anti-rape crusaders you've become, Swedish government! Women in Sweden must suddenly feel safer?

Well, not really. Actually, many see right through you. They know what these "non-charge charges" are really about. And they know that you are cynically and disgustingly using the real and everyday threat that exists against women everywhere to help further the American government's interest in silencing the work of WikiLeaks.

I don't pretend to know what happened between Mr. Assange and the two women complainants (all I know is what I've heard in the media, so I'm as confused as the next person). And I'm sorry if I've jumped to any unnecessary or wrong-headed conclusions in my efforts to state a very core American value: All people are absolutely innocent until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. I strongly believe every accusation of sexual assault must be investigated vigorously. There is nothing wrong with your police wanting to question Mr. Assange about these allegations, and while I understand why he seemed to go into hiding (people tend to do that when threatened with assassination), he nonetheless should answer the police's questions. He should also submit to the STD testing the alleged victims have requested. I believe Sweden and the UK have a treaty and a means for you to send your investigators to London so they can question Mr. Assange where he is under house arrest while out on bail.

But that really wouldn't be like you would it, to go all the way to another country to pursue a suspect for sexual assault when you can't even bring yourselves to make it down to the street to your own courthouse to go after the scores of reported rapists in your country. That you, Sweden, have chosen to rarely do that in the past, is why this whole thing stinks to the high heavens.

And let's not forget this one final point from Women Against Rape's Katrin Axelsson:

"There is a long tradition of the use of rape and sexual assault for political agendas that have nothing to do with women's safety. In the south of the US, the lynching of black men was often justified on grounds that they had raped or even looked at a white woman. Women don't take kindly to our demand for safety being misused, while rape continues to be neglected at best or protected at worst."

This tactic of using a rape charge to go after minorities or troublemakers, guilty or innocent -- while turning a blind eye to clear crimes of rape the rest of the time -- is what I fear is happening here. I want to make sure that good people not remain silent and that you, Sweden, will not succeed if in fact you are in cahoots with corrupt governments such as ours.

Last week Naomi Klein wrote: "Rape is being used in the Assange prosecution in the same way that 'women's freedom' was used to invade Afghanistan. Wake up!"

I agree.

Unless you have the evidence (and it seems if you did you would have issued an arrest warrant by now), drop the extradition attempt and get to work doing the job you've so far refused to do: Protecting the women of Sweden.

Yours,
Michael Moore Source HuffPo

Countdown's Keith Olbermann reports on the story followed by Michael Moore. Tuesday 14th, fifteen minutes.

Original

What Price a Job?

2010-12-16T12:36:00.013Z

A comment left on the previous article prompted me to put this video post together.

The basics in this case are; District Attorney/Prosecutor Mike Nifong, pursued a case of rape against three students from Duke University NC knowing them to be innocent. In a case that would send the defendants up the river for thirty years, effectively a death sentence; rich white boy rapes black sister, Nifong, in his attempt to shorten the odds, withheld crucial DNA evidence from the Grand Jury.

And his motive for all this? Not to keep his job, but to better his chances of being re-elected.

I report on the case here, and the Judicial system in general, make my feelings known on Nifong's jail time here, or, a little less emotionally, you can read the overview of the case here. Which by the way includes this:

In one of the many similar judgments made about how the news media covered the case, columnist David Broder described “a painful exercise in journalistic excess.

Now I'm a great believer in First Amendment rights, but not when it comes to sub judice, not that the US seems to have any, and if it did, the First Amendment would override it. But between the cops, the DA's office and the press, half the poor buggers have already been tried and found guilty before ever setting foot in a courtroom, and when they do appear, it's just for the court to set the sentence.

I don't know which one of the clips it is, but someone makes reference to the weight people, particularly jurors, attach to the simple fact that a prosecutor has seen fit to bring the case. Which might go a long way in explaining why US prisons are half full of innocent people.

Strap yourself in for this figure. Since 1973, one hundred and thirty eight people,138 people have been exonerated from death row alone. And that by anybody's standards is a frightening number of people. I don't really need to pose the follow up question do I? Perhaps better that we spare a thought for poor buggers that no longer walk this earth.

You may think I go on a bit, but I do rail against injustice, that's why I'm here in the first place, it sets me on fire, and it does so no matter the case.

Overview 8 minutes.

Radio comment on Nifong's motives. 2m 3os

This is the clip where Geraldo Rivera talks about the weight given to a prosecutors decision to bring charges. Worth watching for its rarity value, common sense and the truth on Fox News. 3mns

Essential talking points. 4m 30s

Nifong goes to jail. For a day!

Optional viewing. Nine minutes of Mike Nifong speaking in court. Sick bag essential, and if you can get past the four minute mark, you're a better man than I.

Martin Brunt, Oh No They Weren't

2010-12-15T15:40:00.005Z

Said Martin, I'm such a little sycophantic McCann apologist, Brunt of the yard no less, recently:

The dogs were said to have found evidence of blood and a body, but the McCanns were eventually cleared of any involvement in their daughter's disappearance and insist the suspicion around them held up the search for Madeleine and dissuaded potential witness from speaking to police. blah blah

Nice try sunshine, but you're not on.

David Frost - Julian Assange -Al Jezeera

2010-12-14T13:04:00.006Z

Lots of interesting talking points are covered in this thirteen minute interview between David Frost and Lawyer for Julian Assange, Mark Stevens.

That initially Assange had no case to answer, and then under the direction of another prosecutor in another town, combined with vagaries in Swedish law, all of a sudden he did. And of course the Yanks are baying for blood, tell me something new you might ask.

There is even a bit towards the end, though cut short, on Nobel peace prise winner Liu Xiaobo. I shall try to find the rest of it if I can.

A little reading on justice USA.

Thousands of Children Sentenced to Life without Parole

For those that had the luxury of DNA evidence. Exonerated, The Innocence Project

The hysteria following Columbine shootings. Harsher penalties for gun toting kids than for gun toting adults.

Children sentenced to die in prison

USA tops Iran in juvenile executions.

PBS Frontline When Kids Get Life I have watched this documentary previously, it's available at the link in chapters.

It's The Hypocrisy See - Assange - Lieberman

2010-12-13T12:25:00.011Z

Update: What was that you said? Scroll down a tad.
H/t Anon.

Joe Lieberman yesterday, still recovering from the trauma of being surgically removed from George Bush's arse, had this to say:

Lieberman said Assange, who was arrested Tuesday in England, should be charged with treason in the United States. (see link in main text)

Perhaps I have it wrong, but doesn't one have to be citizen of a country before one can be charged with treason? But that's not the cracker in this story, it's from whose mouth it came.

Joe "Benedict" Lieberman, the greasiest, the most disloyal, the most treacherous scumbag ever to take a seat in the Senate in all its history.

I don't follow American politics to the same degree that I used to, but for a man in whom there was so much hope, who looked so dignified and more presidential than all the Presidents of the last fifty years put together, Obama's first failure was not kicking Lieberman's treacherous arse from Washington to wilderness; the political one.

For a Democrat, and a black man at that, to have come so far and to have risen so high, exhibited a naive understanding of Republican party politics. Bridge building and olive leaves, and weakness more than anything, have no place in Republican politics; strength, that's the only game in town.

And whilst on the subject, I'm sure I can't be alone in looking at Sweden and thinking, what a shabby persona it seems to have taken on so very recently, Liebermanesque almost.

As for the story, well....

WikiLeaks' Assange to be indicted for spying 'soon'

'Serious, active' criminal investigation

US prosecutors plan to file spying charges against Julian Assange soon in connection with the publishing of secret diplomatic memos on the WikiLeaks website.

Assange attorney Jennifer Robinson told ABC News that charges would be brought “soon” under the US Espionage Act. The law makes it a felony to receive national defense material if it's known to be obtained illegally and could be used to harm United States interests.

If brought, charges against Assange would reflect a watershed event in the US, which has never successfully prosecuted a news organization for publishing classified information. Indeed, a report released this week by the Congressional Research Service, and published here (PDF) by Secrecy News, acknowledged that federal prosecutors would have a hard time making charges stick against the whistle-blower website, which operates almost entirely abroad.

“There may be First Amendment implications that would make such a prosecution difficult, not to mention political ramifications based on concerns about government censorship,” the report states. “To the extent that the investigation implicates any foreign nationals whose conduct occurred entirely overseas, any resulting prosecution may carry foreign policy implications related to the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction and whether suspected persons may be extradited to the United States under applicable treaty provisions.”

Justice Department officials have declined to comment on their plans, but Attorney General Eric Holder said earlier this week that his agency is doing everything it can to take Assange down.

“We have a very serious, active, ongoing investigation that is criminal in nature,” ABC News quoted him as saying. “I authorized just last week a number of things to be done so that we can hopefully get to the bottom of this and hold people accountable, as they should be.”

Robinson maintains that any attempt to prosecute Assange will fail.

“Our position of course is that we don't believe it applies to Mr. Assange and that in any event he's entitled to First Amendment protection as publisher of WikiLeaks and any prosecution under the Espionage Act would in my view be unconstitutional and puts at risk all media organizations in the US,” she said.

As big a stretch as it sounds to prosecute news agencies for publishing classified documents, US Senator Joe Lieberman has proposed doing just that.

“To me, The New York Times has committed at least an act of bad citizenship,” he said on the right-leaning Fox News network. “And whether they've committed a crime, I think that bears very intensive inquiry by the Justice Department.”

Assange remains in custody in London on sexual assault charges filed by prosecutors in Sweden. The WikiLeaks founder has maintained his innocence, and has said the charges are part of a smear campaign. A lawyer representing the two women Assange is accused of assaulting has insisted his clients are being truthful.

Assange is being held in solitary confinement with restricted access to a phone and lawyers.Via The Register

A couple from way back.

God Bless America and All Her Cant and Hypocrisy

2010-12-11T14:54:00.014Z

God Bless America and All Her Cant and All Her Hypocrisy

If I said this post was all about hypocrisy, (which it is) I would be doing disservice to those people who are shown here being murdered by United States of America. So this post then, is about both hypocrisy and unwarranted bloody murder.

To appreciate just how rank that hypocrisy, it becomes necessary to view the clip below, or, if you have already watched the first, then the second one is still fit for purpose.

Both clips speak for themselves and it requires little further from me. Other than that is, to listen to the Redneck and the Christian in the second clip. I only give them those names to differentiate between the two, but in actual fact they are both Rednecks, as are they all, Redneck being a philosophy not circumstance.

This hour long documentary is more than worthy of watching in its own right, and I can't encourage you enough that you do so. But for the purpose of this post I want to concentrate on two areas. Starting at the 25.30s mark the film shows an American attack helicopter murdering a dozen or more Iraqis who were doing no more than going about their daily business. The callow ease with which these men were murdered, is to say, horrifying. Compounded by, and showing these bringers of democracy for what they really are, common criminals, we hear the voices of the pilot and his gunner, and are treated to the likes of this.

Quote:

"Look at those dead bastards"

"Nice"

And when it is pointed out to this pair of killers, that the Good Samaritan they had just murdered, had his children in the vehicle with him, this.

"It's their fault for bringing their kids to a battle"

All this carnage and murder bad enough, but nothing prepares you for the next couple of minutes starting 40.35s. The narrator tells the story, I can't.

God bless America.

A seventeen minute version of the forty minute original.

Same shit, different war.

Sean Penn/Bill Maher short version.

Sean Penn/Bill Maher long version.

H/T Joana Morais.

Unedited

Too Much To Ask?

2010-12-10T08:28:00.008Z

I suppose it is, but it has always been my opinion that the key to solving this case would come via the back door. Because there is one thing for sure, it isn't going to be resolved by due process, not in this country it ain't.

More Joana Morais.

WikiRebels The Documentary,if you have the bandwidth it's a must watch. If you haven't as yet viewed the murder of Iraqi civilians by the crew of an American helicopter gunship you can do so here. But be prepared to get extremely angry.

Ore Appeal Tossed

2010-12-07T12:32:00.006Z

Judges reject Operation Ore appeal

Claims of card fraud in child abuse pics case dismissed

The Court of Appeal has rejected claims that some individuals prosecuted under Operation Ore for incitement to distribute indecent photographs were themselves the victims of credit card fraud.

Operation Ore was a major, long-running investigation by UK police into individuals who appeared on a US-based database – Landslide – that prosecutors claimed was prima facie evidence of their having subscribed to child abuse material.

At issue was the claim by a Mr Anthony O’Shea that his conviction in October 2005 solely on the grounds that his name appeared on that database was unsafe.

In court last month, his lawyers argued that there was significant evidence that many of those who were drawn into the Ore net were only there because their credit card details had been stolen, despite prosecution claims that the only reason that anyone could be on the database was if they had subscribed voluntarily.
n the majority of instances, where police seized computers from individuals in the UK, an amount of child abuse material was found – ranging from a few images to collections of hundreds, sometimes thousands, of images. In a much smaller subset of cases, no images were found: and in some of these, including that of Mr O’Shea, the Crown Prosecution Service took the decision to prosecute on the grounds that the act of subscribing was an incitement to others to distribute imagery.
Clearly, had Mr O’Shea’s name been placed on the database as a result of fraud, then his conviction would have been open to question.

In the event, the Appeal Court found no evidence of any such fraud and therefore concluded that Mr O’Shea’s conviction was safe. Jim Gamble, ACPO lead for child protection, told the Reg:

“Today’s decision by the Court of Appeal draws a line under the efforts of a small number of individuals who, over the past ten years, have perpetuated conspiracy theories about Operation Ore.

“These allegations are unfounded and sought only to undermine an investigation which led to the safeguarding of more than 154 children. UK policing, and formerly the National Crime Squad, has been unable until now to refute these theories publicly due to a desire not to unduly influence pending prosecutions.

“Whilst convicted offenders understandably wish to disassociate themselves from this type of offence in any way possible, the devastating impact of child abuse on its victims must never be forgotten.”

Mr Gamble also drew our attention to two parts of the verdict that he believed to be particularly damning. In paragraph 54 the judgment states: “These suggestions are fanciful in the extreme. The appellant’s theory (for it is no more than such) that he [Mr O’Shea] was the victim of the machinations of a fraudulent webmaster is, in our view, pure speculation.”

The judgement further states in paragraph 43: “We have no hesitation in rejecting this evidence as incapable in belief. It was mere assertion, unsupported by any published or other material or any reasoning.”

We have contacted the appellant’s solicitors for further comment on this case, but have received no response so far. Register

Operation Ore decision a 'serious miscarriage of justice' - lawyer

Judges ignored evidence, lacked expertise

The solicitor who brought the Operation Ore appeal that was finally rejected today has questioned whether the British courts had the expertise to consider deeply technical cases.

Chris Saltrese, the solicitor who brought the case on behalf of Anthony O'Shea, told us today that in his view, the verdict was "not based on the evidence".more Register

Doing a Bit Of Grooming Yourself Mr Gamble?

A Lack of Proportion

2010-12-04T12:53:00.014Z

John Blacksmith writes: The Madeleine McCann affair falls into four parts to date. First, the disappearance of the child and the subsequent investigation until the McCanns were constituted arguidos in early September 2007; next the flight of the parents and the powerful public and legal campaign in their favour financed by the fund and rich well-wishers, ending in the admission of defeat by the PJ in April 2008 and the subsequent formality of the archiving process; then a period of apparent vindication and retrenchment by the parents brought to an end by Goncalo Amaral’s provocative attack on them in his book and by their decision to sue; finally the flurry of publicity, petitions and the new book announcement, all flowing from the Portuguese appeal court decision.

Distance lends perspective.

The first phase – the search for the child

In retrospect we can see that the famous “search for the child” was effectively over by the end of August 2007 and has never been resumed. The death-knell for Madeleine McCann was sounded not by Goncalo Amaral or his team but by the severely intellectual head of the PJ Alipio Ribeiro, who made it clear during the summer that the inquiry was concentrating on “pure investigation” and analysis of existing data rather than branching out to follow wider leads. No such leads existed and none exist to this day: the enquiry had returned, full-circle, to those known to be present in the Ocean Club on the night of May 3.

The media carnival, so noisy, melodramatic and self-important at the time, has vanished into insignificance, reminiscent of those weighty obituaries of one of their own by newsmen and broadcasters to an indifferent public before they are forgotten for ever. There is general agreement that it was initiated by the McCann family but it is doubtful if it was a critical factor: if decisive forensic evidence had been found to incriminate the McCanns, or forensic traces of an outsider to exonerate them, then no media campaign at that time – in contrast to their defence campaign from the safety of England - would have made any difference to their fate.

No evidence of improper protection of the parents by UK authorities has emerged. The content of the famous foreign office cables is fairly easy to infer, Ribeiro himself denied the claim that Ambassador Buck had in any way intimidated him early in the case and Clarence Mitchell’s absurd and Pooterish hints that he was an arm of the British government have been refuted in previous posts on here.

All the evidence suggests that the Labour government was comfortable in immediately smearing the KY of synthetic “we are suffering with you Maddie” popular sentiment all over the body of the case, prompted by the maladroit Gordon Brown’s hopeless attempt to match the tears for Princess Diana so effortlessly shed by Tony Blair.

The vexed question of why the parents and their friends chose to act independently of the police from the start remains unanswered. The retrospective justification is, of course, (in Glasgow-speak) that the Portuguese police were bluddy useless, didn’t have a clue etc, third world etc, etc. But that couldn’t have been the reason since the two crucial steps - the decision to brief the McCann friends and family on police shortcomings and the outright refusal to abide by the police “no media” instruction - were taken before the police performance could possibly have been assessed as bad or good, in the early hours of May 4. Since the parents were confined to the apartment block for that period they could have had no personal knowledge of either the form or quality of the wider search and thus no evidence to base a decision on.

It remains incomprehensible that the parents could have taken such a grave and critical step – which, according to current police doctrine, would obviously put the child’s life at risk - on such flimsy or non-existent grounds. There is no avoiding the stark reality: “obviously put the child’s life at risk” [at the hands of a panicking abductor] means just that - the McCanns’ refusal to co-operate with the police on Day One may well have been a death sentence for Madeleine McCann.

(Kate McCanns ever so private diary)

The only possible excuse for their actions lies in stress-induced bad and panicky decision taking. But that in itself raises difficult questions, since embarking so prematurely and wilfully on a course with potentially fatal consequences for their own daughter takes us into the murky question of character. One interpretation of the last three and a half years is that the McCanns really are totally innocent victims of an abductor but their personalities are so odious and selfish, their decisions so utterly and malignantly wrong throughout their ordeal, that they have brought dislike, contempt and unwarranted suspicion down onto themselves.More The Bureau.

but their personalities are so odious and selfish

Shurely shome mishtake?

Sounds Familiar

2010-12-02T03:34:00.008Z

I found both these articles quite fascinating, sounding as they do, both similar and familiar.

Ex-Housekeeper says Patsy killed Jonbenet

A federal judge Thursday gave grand-jury witnesses permission to talk about their secret testimony, prompting the Ramsey family's former housekeeper to declare that Patsy Ramsey killed her 6-year-old daughter.

Former Ramsey housekeeper Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, speaking publicly for the first time about her testimony before the Boulder County grand jury, told reporters Thursday:

* She thought Patsy Ramsey had killed JonBenet.

* The grand jury seemed to zero in on Patsy Ramsey, and she thought it would indict her.

* A Swiss Army knife was found in the basement room where JonBenet's body was found.

* "Only Patsy could have put that knife there. I took it away from Burke (JonBenet's older brother) and hid it in a linen closet near JonBenet's bedroom. An intruder never would have found it. Patsy would have found it getting out clean sheets."

* Pieces of rope were tied around JonBenet's neck and wrist when her body was discovered Dec. 26, 1996.

* The blanket wrapped around JonBenet's body had been left in the dryer. There was still a Barbie Doll nightgown clinging to the blanket, so it had to have come out of the dryer recently, she said. Only Patsy would have known it was in the dryer, she said.

* An intruder never would have found the door to the basement room where JonBenet's body was discovered. It was too difficult to see unless someone knew it was there, she said..............

This just a tiny snip from a lengthy transcript of the Larry King Show.

Imagine 'McCanns and Amaral face to face'.. .. the Ramseys call themselves 'TEAM RAMSEY"

(Patsy)P. RAMSEY: Did they show -- did all of those people show all of their evidence to the grand jurors? Why didn't they come.

(Ex cop) .. THOMAS: Let's remember, the grand jury did not exonerate you either.

John) J. RAMSEY: It's not the grand jury's task to exonerate. Their task is to indict.

THOMAS: I think the grand jury may have issued a report had they -- you were the targets of this grand jury.

J. RAMSEY: No question.

THOMAS: You know it.

J. RAMSEY: I know that.

THOMAS: Probable cause wasn't an issue. And Patsy tonight I think I've heard her say she wish she was arrested in this case.

KING: Well, because they feel it would be an end, to have a trial.

J. RAMSEY: We've been tried in public by innuendo and slander from people like you. God knows we would have loved to have a fair trial in a court of law.

THOMAS: I don't apologize for the book. I left a career, Larry, as you said. I wrote the book for the same reason that you did, to put information out publicly.

J. RAMSEY: No, you put that book out to line your pockets with money based on our tragedy.

THOMAS: No, that's not true. And as a matter of fact, I think you wrote a book as well and took money for that.

J. RAMSEY: It's going to charity.
Tell me what...

THOMAS: And I think you've also said it's going to a legal defense fund.

KING: On the other side, you said that one of the reasons this case is unsolved is him.

J. RAMSEY: Absolutely.

KING: Why?

J. RAMSEY: Because he failed miserably in the task he was given. He was inexperienced. He didn't accept help from people... Both articles on the same page.

I have yet to read this myself but here's a link to a 2008 Vanity Fair article if you haven't yet read it yourself. I think this is the one of, "Good Marketing Ploy" infamy.

H/T Caro, SAZ Aktuell

Truth is by nature self-evident

2010-11-27T17:19:00.009Z

I thought it might be prudent to make these McCann examples of terminological inexactitude, available as easy reference, or shall I say, as fast food, eat in or take away.

Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear. - Gandhi

Truth is like the town whore. Everybody knows her, but nonetheless, it's embarrassing to meet her on the street. - Borchert

Kate McCann's Book To Be Truthful (and Scathing)

2010-11-26T09:29:00.023Z

I'm glad that is to be the case; no doubt she will be clearing up a discrepancy or two.

Perhaps she might like to start here with this little lot.

I thought I would take this opportunity to bring together on one page certain discrepancies relating to the night of May third 2007. These discrepancies, or McCann sound bites if you will, are fundamental, nay, they are the cornerstone for the McCann's claim that Madeleine was a victim of stranger abduction.

That this case has progressed to the point it has without these inconsistencies and disparities being addressed, I find not only staggering but scandalous. That such conflicting and contradictory statements made by the parents have never been investigated by any law enforcement agency in this country, is, as I say, not only staggering and scandalous, but shameful. And please, don't give me it's jurisdiction issue.

That parents, in a case of a three year old girl seemingly disappearing off the face of the earth, can make such contradictory statements with impunity, says much for the state of this Nation, it's law enforcement, and not least it's Government.

It matters not that books are written, that documentaries are made, or whatever tripe the press wishes to print in their obsession to sanctify this loathsome pair , it matters not because it is all worthless, it is all utterly without worth until these fundamental questions are answered.

Related post Joana Morais: They think about what they can do to help themselves

The Window: Kate McCann's Red Herring

A red herring born of a red face perhaps.

A first rate article by Then There Were 4, in which he argues the absurdity of the window playing any part of an abduction, when in actual fact all the window theory did, was to allow the McCanns to incriminate themselves further. No longer available.

And do you remember this little bit of damage limitation after the cornerstone of the abduction, the window, now given the status of red herring, by someone sounding increasingly more desperate by the day.

[Kate McCann] The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown.It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring' ~~more~~ Complete article now below: Let's Not Concern Ourselves.

Damage Limitation

Kate McCann's attempt at damage limitation after a few previously known and unknown facts became available to a wider audience after the Lisbon hearing.
eta: If this statement is anything to go by, the book is going to be a doozy.

We are currently in Lisbon for the trial to determine whether the injunction against Mr Amaral's book and DVD should remain in place. This trial is about whether the book is a true reflection of the official judicial process in to Madeleine's disappearance and whether its contents damage the ongoing search for Madeleine, her siblings and our reputations.

Mr Amaral's book and DVD contains some information from the PJ files but there is a lot in the files which is not in Mr Amaral's book. Hence it is highly selective and therefore biased. Mr Amaral's book contains his opinions rather than fact. His opinions differ from the findings in the PJ file. The conclusions of the latter are: 1.there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and 2. there is no evidence that Gerry or I are involved in Madeleine's disappearance. This is very different to the theories and conclusions of Mr Amaral. It is logical and common sense that spreading these theories as Mr Amaral did (and continues todo) damages the search to find our little girl. If the general public (and the Portuguese people in particular) are bombarded day in and day out with such theories, this will eventually 'colour' their understanding and judgement -lies and inaccuracies become fact. If people subsequently believe that Madeleineis dead and that we are involved in her disappearance then they will not look for Madeleine, will not consider any suspicions about others which they may have and will not come forward with information. We consider this highly detrimental to the search for Madeleine.

There are few points which have been raised in the last few days which I would like to address specifically:

Abduction theory:For us, there is only the abduction theory possible because we were not involved in Madeleine's disappearance and we know Madeleine did not wander off by herself. It is obvious and right that the police should consider other theories initially.

The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'

The dogs: We realise that the behaviour of the dogs was the turning point in the investigation for the PJ. The use of dogs has proved to be problematic and unreliable in previous cases

(please refer to the Jersey ‘Haut de La Garenne' case and other research published about their use and reliability). It is vital to note that alerts by such dogs are classified as intelligence rather than evidence, as police officers familiar with their use will verify. These alerts must be supported by forensics in order to be used as evidence. The results of the forensic examinations did not identify any blood or Madeleine's DNA. To suggestor use the dogs´ reactions as evidence is simply wrong and abusive.

The proposed reconstruction: The suggestion of a reconstruction of our movements and other key witnesses at the crime scene and/or surrounding area in the early days following Madeleine's abduction was declined by the PJ as 'not usual' for Portugal. When the PJ finally requested a reconstruction to take place in 2008, Gerry and I were still arguidos and as such would have attended for a reconstruction. Some key witnesses (including some of our friends)declined to attend the planned reconstruction as they were not convinced of the aims and usefulness of it. In particular, as the reconstruction was not to be shown to the media (and hence the general public), they did not feel it would help to find Madeleine. Had the intention been to show it to the general public, it may have 'jogged' memories and encouraged people to come forward with information. It should be added that other key witnesses were not invited to attend.

Our team is confident that the injunction will remain in place because none of the witnesses thus far have been able to prove in court that Mr. Amaral's right to express his opinion is superior to the rights of our family to peace, respect and protection of reputation, and above all, the right to continue the search for our daughter Madeleine effectively and without hindrance. As has been made clear this week, Mr Amaral's ‘thesis' is not supported by any evidence. The search for Madeleine must go on until we find her and bring her abductor(s) to justice.

Kate McCann
Damage Limitation

Let's Not Concern Ourselves, They're Only Details

Just what does it take to get arrested by the Leicester police?

The corner stone of this nonsensical abduction story offered by the McCanns has always centred around the window and the "jemmied shutters."

I have written about the shear impossibility of such a scenario here, and Dr Martin Roberts addresses the same likelihood and can be found at this link.

Below in black and white and on video tape are the accounts of McCann family members and friends, etched in stone as it were, and there is only one indisputable source for these accounts, Kate and Gerry McCann.

But firstly, prior to reading these accounts, we have to take a good look at the latest incredible words of Kate McCann.

This single paragraph is but one of many taken from the McCanns feeble effort to limit the fallout from what came to light in Lisbon. This latest blog entry written by Kate McCann? after their failed and misguided attempt to silence Goncalo Amaral and as such silence the truth.

The window: I described to the police officers exactly what I found that night, as it was and is highly relevant and I knew that every little detail could be helpful in finding my daughter which is our only aim. The window which is a ground floor window was completely open and is large enough for a person to easily climb through it. Whether it had been opened for this purpose remains unknown. It could of course have been opened by the perpetrator when inside the apartment as a potential escape route or left open as a 'red herring'

In the immortal words of John McEnroe, you cannot be serious, you really really cannot be serious.

Apart from a few lines by way of introduction, I have just posted the relevant parts of various articles.*

~

Agony as 3-yr-old vanishes from holiday flat

A HUGE hunt was going on last night for three-year-old Maddy McCann, feared snatched from her holiday flat.

Maddy is believed to have been taken as she slept in the complex on Portugal's Algarve as her doctor parents ate at a bar 120ft away. Her scent was picked up by a police sniffer dog. But it petered out after 400 yards.

Yesterday, 24 hours after the young child vanished in quiet Praia da Luz, anguished parents Gerry and Kate, both 38, of Rothley, Leics, begged for her return.

A friend said: "Kate rang us totally hysterical, saying Maddy was abducted. They're devastated."

The appalling news that three-year-old Maddy McCann was feared kidnapped from her holiday flat came in a distraught phone call early yesterday from her dad.

Heart specialist Gerry McCann rang his sister Trish in Scotland after Maddy vanished from her cot placed between two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

Trish revealed yesterday: "He was breaking his heart, saying 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted'."

Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken.

"They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her."

Close family friend Gill Renwick, of Liverpool, who also spoke to GP Kate yesterday, said: "Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn.

"Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters were forced."

"The window shutters, which had been closed since we arrived on Saturday, were open along with the window. They can be opened from the outside.

"The window opens on to a car park. The door to the room was shut. It looks as if someone has come through the window and possibly left through the door."

~ ~ ~

Close family friend Jon Corner, of Liverpool, told how tearful Kate sobbed down the phone early yesterday: "Someone has taken my little girl."

Jon, godparent to the McCanns' twins, said: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been abducted.

"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing It looks as though someone had gone straight past the twins to get to her. Kate was incredibly upset. I've spoken to her since, and she's still completely devastated.
"She's also very upset that the police don't seem to be doing more to find Madeleine. She thinks there's too little happening."

Mark Warner management denied there were signs of forced entry at the flat claiming instead that roller shutters had been slid up and the bedroom window opened.
~ ~ ~

Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said Kate telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.

He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'

"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."

After speaking to her a second time, he repeated his earlier account, but this time in stronger language

He told how tearful Kate sobbed down the phone early yesterday: "Someone has taken my little girl."

He continued: "She was in an absolutely hysterical state - very, very distressed. She blurted out Madeleine had been abducted.

"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed. Madeleine was missing It looks as though someone had gone straight past the twins to get to her. Kate was incredibly upset. I've spoken to her since, and she's still completely devastated.

"She's also very upset that the police don't seem to be doing more to find Madeleine. She thinks there's too little happening." (Get it in early.)

~ ~ ~
Brian Healy Grandfather.

"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."

I reiterate, Just what does it take to get arrested by the Leicester police?

Madeleine McCann was a three year old girl and a Leicestershire resident.

JUST WHAT DOES IT TAKE?

Let's Not Concern Ourselves

~ ~ ~

Lastly, the curtains.

Your Witness Stu

Just a little reminder.

4003 to 4004 Email from Stuart Prior to the PJ (in English)
15-Processos Vol XV Page 4003 to 4004

4003

Fax

Date: 18th January 2008

From: Stuart Prior

To: Ricardo Paiva

Subject: BC4 Memo, Gail Cooper doc. Gail Cooper statement, Iris Morgan doc, report Morgan doc, Rex Morgan doc.

Ricardo,

All the docs attached in this and the next two emails as discussed earlier today.

We are still working on one or two aspects and I will get back to you over this and for any further direction from yourselves over facial recognition.

As we have discussed I have given Gerry a brief update just saying that the other descriptions are different to the artists impressions completed by Gail and identified by Jane. That the witnesses appeared genuine which indicates a number of charity collectors in the area prior to Madeleine being taken. I informed him everything has been forwarded to yourselves.

We have not spoken with Jane at all and will not share our e fits with anybody except yourselves unless you request this from us. It appears there were at least three charity collectors if not more in the area in the weeks prior to Madeleine being taken.

I am told that the artist impression by Gail Cooper is likely to hit the media over the weekend and I will update you on the effects of this next week, although we are not involved in this in any way at all.

Hope all is well.

Spk soon.

Stu

~ ~ ~
Your witness.

At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.
Kate McCann, in a statement to the Policia Judiciária, may 4th, 2007
~

At 10pm, Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment, using her key and saw that the bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open. The doors were locked except the one at the back as already noted above.
Gerry McCann, in a statement to the Policia Judiciária, may 4th, 2007
~

It wasn’t until Kate walked into the villa at 10 and felt a sickening breeze—the front window had been jimmied open—that she realized something terrible had happened. “The scene was stark,” Gerry tells me. On one bed the twins lay sleeping. In the next lay only the plush cat toy Madeleine was never without. That was when Kate came out screaming, “Madeleine has gone!”
Vanity Fair January 10, 2008

~

K: I did my check about 10.00 ‘clock and went in through the sliding patio doors and I just stood, actually and I thought, oh, all quiet, and to be honest, I might have been tempted to turn round then, but I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we’d left it. I went to close it to about here and then as I got to here, it suddenly slammed and then as I opened it, it was then that I just thought, I’ll just look at the children and I could see S and A in the cot and then I was looking at M’s bed which was here and it was dark and I was looking and I was thinking, is that M or is that the bedding. and I couldn’t quite make her out. It sounds really stupid now, but at the time, I was thinking I didn’t want to put the light on cos I didn’t wanna wake them and literally, as I went back in, the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn,… were closed, … whoosh … It was like a gust of wind, kinda, just blew them open and cuddle cat was still there and her pink blanket was still there and then I knew straight away that she had, er, been taken, you know.
Kate McCann in C4 Cutting Edge documentary - Madeleine was here, april 2008

~

Kate: Yeah, so I thought well I'll just close it over again, and as I went to close it over it slammed shut and I thought and it was like sort of you know a draught had caused it to shut so I turned behind me and I thought are the patio doors open and they were closed and I thought well that's strange so then I opened the door thinking I'll open it ajar a bit again and that was when I kind of looked into the room and when I just looked and it was quite dark and I was just looking and looking at Madeleine's bed and I was thinking is that her that I was looking for why isn't Madeleine there? And then in the end I walked over and thought oh, she's not in bed and then I thought maybe she's wandered through to our bed and that's why the door's open so I went through to our bedroom and she wasn't there and then I kind of see then I'm starting to panic a bit and I ran back into their room and literally as I went back into their room the curtains that were drawn over just "foooosh" flew open and that's when I saw that the shutter was right up and the window was pushed right open. And that was when I just knew that erm someone had taken her. So I, I mean I ran to the window and I didn't know what I thought was going to see but I ran to the window and then I quickly hmm quickly looked through the wardrobes I had I suppose this temporary thought she was cowering in a wardrobe or something anyway she wasn't there and I just ran out and soon as...
Kate McCann on the Oprah show, may 2009. Your Witness Stu

~

A couple of clips and a link relative to this nonsense.

Trish Cameron: They last checked at half past nine; they were all sound asleep, sleeping; windows shut; shutters shut. Kate went back at ten o'clock to check; the front door was lying open; the window had been tampered with; the shutters had been jammied open... or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing.
McCann Files: 'Frantic search for toddler' Video BBC

Straight from the off we get a lesson in McCann style child care, better to leave the kids on their own rather than with a baby sitter they don't know. But it's not Phil McCann's spin that really concerns us here, it's other stuff, stuff like:

Gerry and Kate are in a clear line of sight of their kids.
No they weren't. and
It is obvious that someone with malicious intent went through that window and took Madeleine from the safety and security of her family.
No they didn't, nobody went through the window and took Madeleine 'from the safety and security of her family'

A little later:

Ian Woods: And it must be very frustrating for them to just be sitting, waiting for news. Is there... is there a temptation for them to... to get out and... and try and search themselves,

Philomena McCann: Yeah, well, I mean, for Gerry and Kate, they want to get out there. They want to search everything; they want to leave nothing unturned but,....... source McCann Files - 'It Is Abhorrent To Suggest Bad Parenting'

And we all know about getting out there.

Footnote: It's not an impossible scenario to imagine, although a lot less likely, (and even less likely knowing the parents) although a lot less likely because of the age of the child involved, but I have taken other people's kids on on foreign holidays. And anybody who has ever had kids of their own will know why, Daaaad, Muuum, I'm bored.

But had for instance the McCanns taken one of our Matty's sprogs, or our Stu's kids abroad, and one of them was "abducted." I can't help but ask myself, would 'because Gerry McCann says the kid was abducted' be good enough for any of these parents and upholders of the law?

Answers on a postcard please.

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest

2010-11-23T10:14:00.006Z

A re-up for this previous common sense observation, and analysis on the same theme from Dr Martin Roberts.

Just Who IS loooking?
By Dimsie The Maddie Case Files.

I've never been sure who these people who've stopped looking for Madeleine because of GA's book actually are. They can't be the McCanns' friends and relations because obviously they believe every word Kate and Gerry say about the 'abduction' and so will be ignoring anything Amaral says to the contrary. They can't be the pro's that keep popping up in forums to tell us how we're all wrong and how dreadful Amaral is (and Tony Bennett too, of course), because they too are convinced Amaral is a monster for not believing in the 'abduction' and so they'll ignore him. They can't be members of the public because most members of the public have jobs to go to, families to look after, lives of their own to lead, and are far too busy to head off somewhere looking for Madeleine. So who are they? Who has stopped looking for Madeleine because of Amaral's book?

Come to think of it, who has STARTED looking for Madeleine? I haven't read any reports in the papers about the friends and relatives of the McCanns combing the wilder parts of the area around PdL where Edgar informs us she's being held. I can't see how the pro's who spend their time writing rubbish about the rest of us can have any time left over to join search parties; how many of THEM are in Portugal, knocking on doors and asking to inspect people's cellars? I don't know of any member of the public who's gone anywhere looking for Madeleine, let alone join Dave and Arthur for a tramp around the lawless wastelands of the Algarve, where presumably white man has not yet laid foot. I don't think either of Madeleine's parents is in Portugal, co-ordinating the search, though of course I could be wrong. Maybe we'll hear tomorrow that now that Kate has translated the files she's off to Portugal to tell the PJ how to start this most important search. But until I see it on tv I won't believe it.

Hmm, it seems NO ONE is looking for Madeleine, except a couple of incompetent (according to the Mail on Sunday) ex-cops, whose opinions change from one week to the next and who think that the way to find a child they're sure is entombed in a cellar in Portugal is to take a trip to Australia.

By Dr Martin Roberts
20 November 2010

CLOUD CUCKOO LAND

So, esteemed Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte, acting on behalf of the McCanns, is progressing with plans to 'appeal the appeal', so to speak.

Just as Gonçalo Amaral had to present grounds for calling into question a judge's decision to uphold an injunction against him, Duarte has to furnish an argument sufficient both to endorse the original decision and to outweigh, rather than merely counter, the basis of the appeal court's reversal of that decision. In talking openly to the press she gives the impression of being quite confident she can do exactly that. Her optimism is founded on her view that 'essential facts' had not been taken into account by the appeal court judges. And what might these 'essential facts' be? Ms Duarte helpfully goes on to clarify:

1. Gonçalo Amaral's book was published to make money.

2. Gonçalo Amaral's book had inflicted pain and suffering on her clients, the McCanns.

3. Gonçalo Amaral's book had impeded the search for Madeleine by entertaining the hypothesis that Madeleine in fact died on the night of her disappearance.

It is as well to bear in mind that we are not talking about a professional 'also ran' here. Ms Duarte is a pre-eminent legal representative and a candidate for election to the presidency of the Portuguese equivalent of our bar association. Any client of hers is entitled therefore to suppose her own grasp of Portuguese law to be complete. As far as is possible, subtlety of interpretation should position her advocacy several degrees above mere recourse to common sense. So what do the McCanns get for their money?

Gonçalo Amaral published a book to make money

Who doesn't? The McCanns themselves have just announced an intention to reap the benefit of their own 'account of the truth' in due course. Gonçalo Amaral is not a public information service. Even if he were, he would be entitled to recover his costs, surely. How is he supposed to do that without making money? Think of public transport services even. Buses, trains etc. carry passengers, but not before they've bought tickets.

Some years ago I bought my own daughter a 'teach yourself flute' video. She and I were both disappointed to discover that lesson one amounted to 'open the box and put the instrument together.' Isabel Duarte's 'essential fact' number one is itself so obvious, as well as irrelevant, that like the many such leads previously filed by the PJ, it scarcely warrants a second glance. Does Ms Duarte really suppose the Supreme Court in Portugal is likely to see it another way?

Gonçalo Amaral's book has inflicted pain and suffering on the McCanns

We might be dealing with a case of double entendre here, in as much as the hypothesis of Madeleine's death, be it right or wrong, might well cause the McCanns pain either way. However, supposing that said hypothesis is in error, and painful for that reason, it would have been painful when first put before the public. Amaral's book was published, in Portuguese, in July 2008. The McCanns libel action was commenced over a year later.

Pain and suffering is something we generally try to alleviate at the earliest opportunity. To suffer unduly over time is indicative either of a masochist or someone more fearful of the treatment than the malady. Self evidently the McCanns' pain and suffering was not sufficiently acute for them to do anything about it for a year at least. And in January this year they arranged and attended a society dinner, to be seen and photographed in the company of a variety of T.V. personalities. At £150 per head, this particular social gathering was a serious fund-raising event, not a vehicle for the relief of pain and suffering, of which there has been no public sign whatsoever since the McCanns 'got over' the first 48 hours, much less since publication of A Verdade da Mentira.

Question: Ms Duarte, could you please quantify, or at least evidence, the pain and suffering endured by your clients as a direct consequence of the material discussed in Dr Amaral's published work?

No? Then let us turn to 'essential fact' number three:

Gonçalo Amaral's book has impeded the search for Madeleine

The search for something lost carries a transitive connotation. Besides the person or object searched for there are the locations searched. It implies an active endeavour on someone's part. We may remind ourselves, ad nauseam almost, that searching, in these terms, is something the McCanns themselves have completely failed to do. We know also that their various investigative mercenaries have been remiss in this very same regard. Not so the host of Portuguese and others who dedicated their time and energy to that very task, in the immediate aftermath of the McCanns' protestations on the evening of May 3, 2007. They 'searched' alright.

Are the McCanns therefore concerned that Amaral is in some way inhibiting the actions of those who have already done their bit? Should all these good people, having once searched in vain, search anew? If so, how frequently? The McCanns, as we know, retain a team of staff whose job it is to search, co-ordinate the search, or raise money to fund the search, none of whom will have been in any way dissuaded by disparaging comments written in a foreign language. 'He who pays the piper...' and all that. Perhaps by 'searching' the McCanns really mean to describe the actions of the countless conscientious citizens worldwide who might be inclined to keep a watchful eye out for any child resembling Madeleine's description and who could conceivably be she. If so, then we are no longer talking about searching per se, but addressing behaviour which would not be influenced by third-party opinion in any language.

Consider, if you will, a rather outlandish analogy: A hypothetical team of 'Indiana Jones' types believe they are just a few clues from discovery of the Holy Grail, when along comes Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown and explains, in print, why they are all wasting their time, because the Holy Grail is not actually a drinking vessel after all. So, to a man, the intrepid archaeologists give up their search. Having invested time, money and energy in pursuing their quarry, they down tools and go home, on Dan Brown's say so. Do they indeed? And if one or other of them happens to discover, in a not inappropriate location, a goblet conforming to his or her understanding of what the Holy Grail should be like, is that person likely to dismiss it as 'not the Holy Grail' because it contradicts Dan Brown's theory? Similarly, would anyone catching sight of a young girl with a conspicuous coloboma in her right eye and answering to the name Maddie ('She hated it when we called her that' - KM) ignore her completely on account of Gonçalo Amaral's opinion? This is a little girl's life we're talking about remember.

Question (We've been here already): Ms Duarte, could you please quantify or evidence the extent to which the search for Madeleine has been impeded by Dr Amaral's published work?

No? Then why on earth has this court been convened? Give the man his books back and stop wasting our time! And while you're at it you might just review your own career objectives (Plan B could come in handy).

H/t McCann Files. No permanent link.

Great Scott Holmes! exlaimed Watson, this is a fantasy

2010-11-23T09:35:00.008Z

"....whose pupils now loomed huge and crazy in his drug filled eyes..."

More great stuff from The Bureau, covering some excellent points , and if not in a new style, certainly new to me.

Stranger and stranger
by John Blacksmith

“And so,” said Holmes, “of the nine members of the group, four told the authorities that they were checking the well-being and safety of their children every fifteen minutes, two, the parents of the abducted child, said every half an hour, and two more had availed themselves of a telegraphic device, newly invented, which enabled them to listen to their children from afar.”

Outside daylight was beginning to fade. Baker Street resounded to the reassuring bustle of tradesmen, the clop and rattle of hansom cabs and the fierce cry of a passing fishwife. The pole of a lamplighter could be seen, turning on the bright yellow flare of gas. It was a homely scene, Dr Watson reflected, in deep contrast to the unsavoury mystery that Holmes was outlining.

“That’s eight,” said Watson, with unwonted sharpness, did you not say there were nine?”

“One of them apparently suffers from dementia praecox,” said Holmes, reclining in what he called his “thinking chair””. He reached out to the small table at his side and took a large pinch of cocaine from a Willow Pattern saucer. “I regret to say that she has some difficulty in remembering her own name. At least in matters concerning this affair.”

“Holmes, old man, do you remember writing once about impossibility? Hang on, I think you said, whatever is left after one excludes –”.....more

Words Fixed For Ever. A Brave Decision

2010-11-18T01:08:00.017Z

New post; Your Questions Answered

More good stuff from the Bureau.

A brave decision?
by John Blacksmith

It is good news that the McCanns are going to write a book.

If the parents wish to earn money to search for the child, what harm can it do? No, it won’t assist the search, we all know that: three and a half years have shown that any private investigators with a bit of nous familiarise themselves with the evidence, note where it’s pointing and either turn the job down or ruthlessly exploit the parent’s vulnerabilities. The others, the lowly ex-cops who are willing to accept the way the wind blows from Camp McCann, have found nothing. So it will continue.

They are going to find it very tough indeed to write, but that’s their problem, not ours. At the end of it, after the serializations which, like their version of the archiving report, will be the spin, not the reality, we, and the reviewers, will have their book before us, the words fixed for ever.

The blog specifically avoided the whole question of truthfulness, for “operational reasons” and the needs of judicial secrecy; the introduction of spokespeople guaranteed that they could not be held to account for their words because spokespeople are always “deniable”; the interviews they have given, all rigidly structured beforehand, tell us literally nothing except about their demeanour.

Now they will be heard in their own words and it is Mission Impossible....more

BBC East Midlands. Let Me Answer That

2010-11-16T13:36:00.016Z

The same motive that drives us all, it is called justice. But unlike yourselves, we are impartial to where that justice falls.

We desire justice for Madeleine McCann and we desire justice for Kate and Gerry McCann.

Even in this day and age, it's not a too radical a concept for you to comprehend is it, not too inconceivable, this principal to which we all aspire, this thing called justice?

I don't know what it is that I should accuse you of, being unable to grasp this concept, or that it is indeed firmly in your ken, within your cognizance. I don't know which to accuse you of, because frankly, I don't know which is the more damning, but were I to hazard a guess, it would be fair to assume into which sphere that guess would fall, and how damning is that?

How the mighty are fallen, how reduced now this BBC, so reduced that it is now indistinguishable from that most repugnant of establishments, the gutter press of this country. As indistinguishable as you are complicit and as complicit as you are contemptible.

As equally do the press, so equally do you offend me, offend my country, offend decency, but above all these things, for an organisation that presumes to call itself a news agency, you offend the truth. I know your truth I know your worth, it is as contemptible as it is base.

It falls upon me to ask a question that has arisen from reading your few lines of blurb about the up-coming program, about your, I can't say investigation for you do not know the meaning of the word, what should I call it, a McCann puff piece, you tell me how I should call the thing?

The "discredited detective" I shall choose to ignore, although you might find that he is far from that, nevertheless ignore it I shall and ask of you this one question.

Apart from yourselves and your Haridan colleagues of fleet Street, would you care to explain from which source, and upon what grounds, you feel free make a statement thus:

Her parents were cleared of playing any role in her disappearance

Were they, were they really? Do you know, in spite of the many thousands of collective hours spent by myself and my colleagues around the world, in spite of all those hours, neither I nor those colleagues have ever seen one word in print that would justify making such a statement. Only the words of yourselves of course, and we have already discussed their value.

Next on:
Monday, 19:30 on BBC One (East Midlands only)

What happened to Madeleine McCann remains a mystery. Her parents were cleared of playing any role in her disappearance, but a controversial group continues to campaign in support of a discredited detective who claims Kate and Gerry McCann covered up the truth. Inside Out investigates the members and motives of the Madeleine Foundation.

The case files from the investigation, translated from Portuguese into English, can be found at The Maddie Case Files. I was about to suggest that you...... no best forgotten I think.

Disclaimer. I have no connection whatsoever, active or otherwise, with Tony Bennett or the Madeleine Foundation.

And on the Long List, iiiiiit's Kate and Gerry McCann

2010-11-14T20:01:00.012Z

I thought I might update this piece with the same reply that I posted in the comments section.

This then in reply to being, light-heartedly accused must be said, of taking the piss.

Me take the piss? Louise, compared to these two I'm a rank amateur at the game, a mere beginner. I couldn't aspire to anything near close, not to the level that these two have achieved, not a hope in hell, not in a million years could I.

The McCanns are going to write a book. As things finally seem to be moving in the right direction, a direction that hopefully will lead to that which will damn them, the truth. That truth set to bring their world crashing down around there ears, crashing down equally on untold, but most deserved others, and what are the McCanns doing?

They are writing a book.

Two people, who for the life of them couldn't lie straight in bed, two people who's constant and innumerable lies are catalogued here on these pages, as equally as they are catalogued at a myriad of other sites throughout the net, these same two people are going to write a book. They are going to write a book in order that they may, "give an account of the truth."

And you accuse me of talking the piss?

It's not Christmas just yet it is it?

I shall never be stuck for inspiration ever again, pennies from heaven?!! it don't come anywhere close. I'm still trying to imagine it, "Madeleine Illustrated." I think I need to lie down, I have a touch of the vapours.

Forgive them, for they know not what they do.

"Maddie" Parents to write a book about her search

Europe Online
From APD correspodents
Sunday 14 November 2010
With thanks to Joana Morais for translation

London (APD) - The parents of Madeleine McCann, who has been missing for more than 3 years, want to write a book about the search for their daughter. The book will carry the simple title of "Madeleine" and will be published on 28 April 2011, about four years after the disappearance of the child, said the publisher Transworld this Sunday in London.

The proceedings from the sale will go to the fund to search for "Maddie", who has been specially set up by the family. The British media reported a few days ago that the money in the fund - mostly donations from around the world - would be depleted next year. Several publishers fought for the rights to publish the book.

"The reason why I am writing this book is simple - to give an account of the truth," said Kate McCann, Madeleine's mother. "For us there is nothing more important than to find our little girl." Her husband Gerry said he hoped that the book could help solving of the case. "Our hope is that people who have useful information - knowingly or unknowingly - will report and share it with our team."

The then nearly four-year-old child, Madeleine, disappeared from a hotel room when the British family were on holiday in Portugal in 2007. The parents went to have dinner that night in the vicinity. A highly media-covered search investigation ensued.

The case has not yet been solved. The couple were accused several times, of the possibility of having simulated the kidnapping of Madeleine themselves, after they had found the child dead in the apartment. The family denies it.

h/t The McCann Files / Joana Morais

Collusion For Beginners

2010-11-12T22:15:00.004Z

Collusion For Beginners
by John Blacksmith

THE KILLER TIMELINES

Three people are known to have been involved in the creation of the first two, illustrated yesterday: Gerry McCann, David Payne and Russell O’ Brien. Where? In apartment 5A. When? Between, say, 11.30 PM- 2AM on the night of May 3/4. More details? Few: only O’ Brien – who’d been seen in possession of them by the Portuguese police – has been questioned about them: that was in 2008 and by then he’d forgotten all about them, even their very existence.

The Third Timeline

This is different from the other two. It is a typed document which, according to David Payne, “represented the views of the whole group”. It was finalised after the first police statements had been given on May 4 but before the second round of questioning on May 10.

The group asked if they could take it into their second interviews so that they could refer to it! The request was refused. So far, so daylight.

Motivation

The possible motivations are numerous and obvious. What is the “innocent” explanation – the one that the participants have given and that, out of fairness, we should accept? There isn’t one – after three and a half years! They will not agree to clarify them or reconstruct the movements they claim to describe. That is the heart of the “why won’t you?” question.

Taking all the evidence together the explanation that is most favourable to the group is that they conspired to stretch the evidence in order to protect themselves against potential accusations of child neglect.

All other credible explanations are less favourable to the group. more

Blogger Etiquitte: Don't Rob The Blogger

2010-11-12T11:08:00.012Z

Blogger Etiquette. Don't Rob The Blogger Of His Pay (Expanded from the original)

For the vast majority of Bloggers, that pay, the only pay, is knowing that they are being read.

If you take for example, any respectable blog, usually the American ones, for it is they that led the blogger revolution, you will find that the following code of practice is adopted by the majority.

Blogger Etiquette:

If a person/blogger spends a great deal of time and goes to extraordinary lengths researching, and then penning an article; it is neither mannerly nor morally correct for you to copy paste the COMPLETE article on your blog.

Post just enough to attract the interest of your reader and then link back to the authors blog.

The author deserves recognition for his work, and this is only achieved by traffic to the article/site.

It's only fair and it's only polite.

Which of course it is, and more importantly, the blogger who has produced the work gets recognised in his own right and his blog worthy of a visit. (or not)

If the complete article is posted, all the attribution in the world won't compensate for direct traffic. How many times do any of us click through to the original source having once read the complete article? Try putting yourself in the Blogger's shoes for a week; having spent X number of hours/days researching and constructing your article, you post it on your blog and then you sit back for a while with a cuppa and a ciggy, or your drug of choice, and wait. But more often or not you would working on your next little creation, but that's by the by. What isn't by the by however, is when that Blogger (you) takes a look at his site metre after a day or two and sees numbers that might be worthy of being described as abysmal.

How is he/her/you going to feel? pissed I shouldn't wonder, pissed and robbed. And then, in a worse case scenario, might think to themselves, why bother?

There is of course a practical side to doing this, if you are posting a dozen items or more a day, you don't end up with a blog a mile long, as you would do otherwise.

And I do practice what I preach by the way, it would only be under special circumstances or out of necessity that I do otherwise. And believe me please, it's not for my benefit that I write this, it's for the numerous authors who's work I see constantly plastered around the net like cheap wallpaper.

Stop please, I beg of you.

Now I know Why

2010-11-11T05:05:00.008Z

Update: Ed Smart seems to be topical at the moment, but what gives my hinky meter a jolt is not just hinky Ed, but the fact that Brian Mitchell was committed rather than standing trial. Something is alarmingly wrong here, mental disorder is normally about as important as a zit to prosecutors when it comes to trying and frying perps.

And of course, let us not forget, Utah is run by the batshit crazies, who themselves seem to have a penchant for young brides. The power and sway of the Mormon Church in Utah must be frightening.

Now I know why Jim Gamble felt comfortable giving his unequivocal support to the McCanns, in spite of them both being Arguidos at the time. And the answer is simple, he's fucking insane.

In truth I have done little more than follow the links supplied by OBU Investigators, and copied the articles I found there. There is a bit of interesting stuff down the page, a Guardian article from yesterday, plus a couple of other bits of interest, not least a piece featuring MP for Leicester East, Keith Vaz, who I have to say, is just as crazy as gamble. When you read these articles, please I beg you, don't loose sight of what it is they are actually talking about.

But first I would like to put this 2008 article before you. I have only highlighted a couple things, but listen to the man, stroll on! I'm not surprised Theresa May said, mind the door on your way out, not surprised at all at all.

The consensus of opinion at the OBU on ITVs "Exclusive," seems to be that it's old stuff re-hashed. But this is a by the by as far as this post is concerned.

Concerns raised over online child safety
Ben Dowell
Tuesday 18 March 2008

Jim Gamble, chief executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, has said that some internet service providers were not doing enough to protect children online.

"Some people who say they are co-operating aren't," Gamble told the Commons culture, media and sport select committee today, but admitted that they were a "minority" of service providers.

"We talk about the industry as this large single entity but it isn't like that," he said. "Most of the industry partners are very good, some are mediocre, some are just not good."

Gamble declined to name individual ISPs, despite being pressed by the committee chairman, Conservative MP John Whittingdale, and another committee member, the Tory MP Nigel Evans, to specify which companies he was referring to.

Insisting that it would not be "fair" to identify companies he felt were not being sufficiently co-operative, Gamble did insist that his patience was being "tested" and suggested that ISP's who were not being as co-operative were harming children.

"I am a father of three children and I am not having them [ISPs] hiding behind my organisation if they are a danger to children," he said. "There comes a time when enough is enough."

Gamble added that the CEOPC, which has 115 full time staff and is affiliated to the national police unit the Serious Organised Crime Agency, was "under resourced".

There was currently a backlog of about 700 uninvestigated cases relating to possible exploitation of children on the interet, he told the committee, although the most serious incidents are prioritised by Soca.

"Do we need greater investment and do we need it now? The answer to that is simply yes," he said.

Gamble called on the internet industry to show more "clarity of purpose" and to co-operate on providing and developing software blocking devices and other ways of protecting children.

"But if various companies bring out four or five packages schools will wonder 'which ones do we choose?'," he said.

Gamble also called for a new crime of adults having "cybersex" with a child avatar, or character, in a virtual online game.

"If you want to have sex with a child and would fantasise about having sex with a child, either in this one or a virtual one, we need to investigate whether they are a danger to children," he said.

Gamble added that his organisation did not act on anonymous reports, suggesting there were many unregistered incidents and each one could relate to several hundred offenders.

Activities that have been brought to the CEOPC's attention included paedophiles coaxing children into providing explicit images of themselves in return for "virtual" rewards on internet gaming sites, Gamble said.

Giving evidence later Nicholas Lansman, secretary general of the Internet Service Providers' Association, said that blocking and monitoring of potentially harmful content was working effectively but added that it was "incumbent upon the industry to address the bad parts".

Camille de Stempel, director of policy at AOL, and Mike Galvin, BT's director of customer experience, defended their companies' attempts to protect children online.

"I don't have the feeling that some companies are not co-operating," said de Stempel. "There is a real willingness to get involved in Home Office initiatives against cyber bullying and so on."

Galvin told the committee that most parents are failing to make use of internet content filtering controls to protect their children online.

He said that BT estimated that only 42% of its broadband customers with children between five and 15-years-old had set up BT Yahoo! content filtering control settings. Gruniad

Case could clear names of hundreds of men accused of child pornography
Afua Hirsch and Louise Shorter
Wednesday 10 November 2010

Hundreds of men who say they were wrongly accused of child pornography offences could have their names cleared after a case to be heard in the court of appeal tomorrow.

One of the 3,700 men arrested as part of Operation Ore in 2002, who says his life was ruined after he was falsely associated with one of the UK's biggest online child-abuse rings, will argue that his credit card details were stolen and used on paedophile sites.

The case stems from Operation Ore, an unprecedented police investigation that led to the arrest of 3,700 men in 2002 after they were linked to an American US-based website, "Landslide.

Police and prosecutors claimed that the men had all clicked on a banner advert on the site, which read: "Click here for child porn," and that police had obtained the names and addresses of more than 7,000 UK users who had followed the link.

But the lawyer acting for the man mentioned said that many of the suspects were innocent.

"Criminal webmasters would use stolen credit card details or take them from their own legal adult pornography sites and re-enter them to sign up for subscriptions to their illegal sites for child pornography," said Chris Saltrese. "There is evidence of bundles of different cards all being entered from one place, one after the other. It was simple fraud."

The appeal court will also hear that the banner was only ever one of a series of rotating ads that led to a legal adult pornography site.

Operation Ore has attracted controversy in the UK for the number of suspects it targeted. Critics claim that, whereas in the US, details were available of 35,000 users of the site but only 100 were prosecuted, the UK authorities prosecuted 1,800.

Thirty-nine of the men are reported to have killed themselves as a result of being prosecuted during the Ore inquiry, and campaigners say many others pleaded guilty to avoid the publicity of a trial.

The case, which has been strongly contested by officers involved in the original investigation, comes amid continuing controversy over efforts to target child exploitation online in the UK.

In July the government announced that CEOP, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, which is responsible for prosecuting offenders, would be absorbed into the National Crime Agency, following the coalition's programmme (sic) Policing in the 21st Century, announced in June.

Senior politicians close to CEOP have said that absorbing the organisation into the National Crime Agency will put children at risk.

"CEOP's effectiveness will be lost," a senior source said. "Effective child protection relies on knowledge running throughout an agency. It will be difficult to develop this in a large organisation like the National Crime Agency."

Last month head of CEOP Jim Gamble resigned, four months earlier than his expected departure, in protest at the plans, four months earlier than his expected departure, and has been placed on gardening leave. A number of other senior managers in the organisation are also thought to have resigned.

Although Operation Ore was conducted by the National Criminal Intelligence Service, a forerunner of CEOP, the investigation has attracted criticism for the organisation, as today's appeal could pave the way for other men to have their convictions overturned.

"I have clients who have lost everything: their jobs, their homes, their marriages, their children and their health," Saltrese said. Gruniad

The CEOP Jim Gamble Affair
Saturday, 23 October 2010

I realise I am going to be on very unsteady ground here but I'm usually a straight down the middle guy who doesn't rock the boat so I'm going out on a limb with a slightly controversial piece here.

In the few days since Jim Gamble announced his resignation from his role as Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and On-Line Protection Centre (CEOP) he has been accorded almost universal adulation by the British Media and has been followed out of the door by three other senior executives at CEOP. To believe the media Mr. Gamble was an irreplaceable hero who single-handedly protected our children from online harm. Here are a selection of stories from the last 48 hours
"Top Abuse Boss Quitting Puts Kids in Danger" says The Sun; "Resignation A Sad Day" says BBC News; "Victim's Group Slams Home Secretary" says the Daily Mail and in this weeks most tabloid friendly collision of stories "Kate and Gerry McCann "Very Upset" at Resignation" says the Daily Mail natch. Now I'm not denying Jim Gamble was/is a man with a mission and a very laudable one at that. His aim is to prevent the abuse of children. This is something which is unarguable and inalienable. I though have met Mr. Gamble on more than one occasion (and more than two for the wags at the back) and there was something very undesirable about his methods and his message. In a cry that echoed back to the radical feminist cry "All Men are Rapists" Mr. Gamble in public speeches seemed to suggest that all men were paedophiles. The role of CEOP was to protect children at all costs from these almost primeval urges. He also seemed to be suggesting that only CEOP could fulfil this role in the UK. The view of many in industry and the legal profession is he was an empire builder who had a particularly narrow and skewed view of society and in particular the relationship between adults and children. I still have a marginal note I made at one of his speeches where I noted down "I am not a paedophile and I resent the implication I am because I happen to be a man." More The IT Lawyer

Modern games feature ‘virtual rape’, MP tells Parliament
Monday, 3rd March 2008

MP for Leicester East Keith Vaz has put forward the questionable claim that players can “rape women” in modern games to Parliament..........

....Keith Vaz said: “People who are watching a film at the cinema cannot participate in what is happening on the screen, or if they do they are removed from the cinema.
"However, someone sitting at a computer playing a video game, or someone with one of those small devices that young people have these days, the name of which I forget… PlayStations or PSPs, something of that kind. "Well, whatever they are called, when people play these things, they can interact. They can shoot people; they can kill people. As the honourable Gentleman said, they can rape women."more

This kind of zealous fuckwit thinking is nothing new to me, I've got a blog full of it. Try this for size. Hazard a guess at what good old boy, Representative Ralph Davenport of South Carolina is talking about, and what he proposes to do to rectify the situation should the chance arise that, if someone is caught kidnapping someone and using these devices on an unwilling victim.

Three guesses, no? vibrators, he's talking about goddamned vibrators, and his solution? a state wide ban on vibrators. Ridiculous you say? certainly, but not that ridiculous, South Carolina, if the bill passed, would join the global war on vibrators along with the other flat earth states of, Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas.

Beware of zealots and nutters.

Update: Talking of which, I've just come from Joana's blog. In spite of the court ordering that some ten thousand copies of Amaral's book be returned, it would appear that McCann's lawyer, Isabel Duarte, ain't so keen on the idea. I wonder if she's married to that other chancer? they'd make a grand pair.

And then haven't we got the McCanns over there doing whatever it is they're doing, which given the mood in Portugal these days, makes me feel that it all might end in tears.

Beware of zealots and nutters.

Update: I quite like it when folk have a coherent rant, this is the end of the first comment on the Isabel Duarte post at Joanas.

What makes them think they will win a libel trial? They and their friends did not cooperate with the PJ. They allowed archival of their child's case. They do not request re-opening of their child's case. They harmed their child when they decided to leave her in the circumstances they chose to. They still harm her by not allowing her to have an active police investigation into her disappearance. Who's fault is it that there is no law enforcement agency actively looking for their child? Zodiac

Beware of zealots and nutters.

Let's go for one more, and I agree equally with this one as I do the one above.

The McCanns are done for. Game over. They can thrash around and make as much noise as they like now, because they know the end is nigh. They never showed themselves to have anything like good manners when they were being cossetted and everything was going their own way ..... so God knows how appaling their behaviour will become now that they are f*cked. They won't be seeing rainbows anymore .......

And Roy Orbison says it in song far better than I can...(Youtube link)now embedded.

Midas

Beware of zealots and nutters.

High Court to Hear Operation Ore Appeal Today

2010-11-10T01:37:00.004Z

An application for permission to appeal a specimen or test case, will be heard in the High Court on November 11th and 12th.

An immediate ruling is not expected.

General link OBU Investigators Operation Ore class action clear to begin

Let's hope they get a better deal than this fellow.

Justifications, Like Details, You Can Have Too Many

2010-11-09T20:42:00.014Z

Update. Joe Wilson/Plame on Dubya's memoir.

Particularly when you're trying to absolve yourself from starting a war of aggression and being tagged as a war criminal and mass murderer.

And it has to be said, there's no justification like self justification; and not for one minute do I have to remind you of that little castle in the sky.

I read on two subjects yesterday, the first being George Dubya's latest passel of lies in his forthcoming memoir, Decision Points, crayons optional. And t'other, the scribblings of Keir Simmons.

But of all that I read, one thing jumped off the page more than any other. Let me deal with that first then I can move on. See if you can pick out in these few lines just what that something might be?

In clips from a wide-ranging interview in advance of the publication this week of Mr Bush's memoir Decision Points, the former president also discussed his widely-reported decision to give up drinking at his 40th birthday.

"I didn't like the person I was," he said, noting his preference for beer, martini and bourbon. "I was a drinker. Now, I wasn't a knee-walking drunk."

Mr Bush agreed with interviewer Matt Lauer's suggestion that he was a "habitual drinker" rather than an alcoholic. source

Yes that's the bit, kind of sets the tone for what kind of interview one might expect.

(pics below are from the early days, so they might be a tad amateurish in places.)

A few talking points then regarding Bush Forty Three, aka Dubya.

Three people were waterboarded, now call me a tad cynical, but I do have a little trouble with that figure.

The next few lines are not without interest, shedding a little light on Tony Blair's, what I can only describe as a runaway attitude and supportive of Dubya's little folly whole heartedly, no matter what the cost. In short, George and Tony's private war.

I will say though, that the arrogant little fuck has lost none of his arrogance, special relationship did I hear you mention?

With arrogance only matched by his shamelessness, the Forty Third President of the United States of America, treats us to another of his innumerable little gems regarding the present day lot of the Iraqis, post invasion. I won't even give the man the comfort of tagging him deluded on that little issue.

But nothing comes close, as you can well imagine, nothing comes close to Bush's shear audacity as when he treats us to lies, so abject, so utterly contemptible, as when he talks of his disappointment in there being no WMD in Iraq. Mind you I don't want to be so terribly unfair to Dubya, we do need to spare a thought for Tony, 45 minutes, Blair, when all said and done.

Mr Bush's memoir, Decision Points, is being serialised in the Times.

In an interview with the paper the former president said: "Three people were waterboarded and I believe that decision saved lives.".........

.........In Mr Bush's interview with The Times, the 64-year-old former president described his close relationship with Tony Blair, but was dismissive of public opinion in Britain about the war in Iraq.

"It doesn't matter how people perceive me in England. It just doesn't matter any more. And frankly, at times, it didn't matter then," he said.

Mr Bush said when Mr Blair faced a possible vote of no confidence in Parliament on the eve of war, he offered him the chance to opt out of sending British troops into Iraq.

However, Mr Blair told him: "I'm in. If it costs the government, fine."

Mr Bush said he still had "a sickening feeling" about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

But he defended his decision to invade Iraq, saying Iraqi citizens were better off without the former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and the US was better off without Saddam pursuing biological or chemical weapons.

Mr Bush admits that he was shocked when no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. source

We all know the bottom line concerning this shabby pair, of course we do. But as Bill Maher says,"You can't lie anymore." (with the internet) Sorry video pulled. Never mind, try this pertaining to 1999.

War on my mind

By Russ Baker
Houston: Two years before the September 11 attacks, presidential candidate George W. Bush was already talking privately about the political benefits of attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer, who held many conversations with then-Texas Governor Bush in preparation for a planned autobiography.

“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.” more

So much for WMD.

Before we leave our erstwhile President, just a note on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. If you were following the story at the time you would know just what the man held his hand up for, about the only thing he didn't cop to was the Kennedy assassination, but then I'm not so sure about that. So much for the quality of intel resulting from torture.

Right, the other fellow then, and yes I'll also hold my hand up to cherry picking, but at the end of the day I'm doing no more than playing by the oppositions' rules.

Why I was prepared to stand up for journalism and stand up to Lily Allen.
Keir Simmons 22 July, 2010

Which is why it worried me so much that last night Lily Allen accused Channel 4 News of only targeting Zac Goldsmith because he is rich. In other words she questioned the motives of Channel 4 News and their integrity…………

And that would never do would it, I mean who are we to question Channel 4? But wasn't it Channel 4 that brought us.......
I think that statement more than anything epitomises the attitude of Simmons, as described by John Blacksmith in the post below this.

…………It seems to be fashionable to attack journalists and journalism these days. And we should be able to take the criticism and be forced to defend our decisions like anyone else. But it’s worth remembering how crucial to democracy journalism is and that in general journalists’ guiding principles are to tell people what’s happening and to question those in power.
Indeed for their investigation Channel 4 News worked with the ‘Bureau of Investigative Journalism’, a not for profit organisation that aims to promote the kind of difficult journalism that is under threat in these difficult times.
Difficult times in which it’s worth remembering the old adage ‘don’t shoot the messenger’ and perhaps adding another, ‘you’ll miss us when we’re gone’. source

But it’s worth remembering how crucial to democracy journalism is. Stop for fucks sake. And.

and perhaps adding another, ‘you’ll miss us when we’re gone’. Just like I'd miss Leprosy, what a puffed up delusional fuckwit if ever there was.

Keir Simmons 6 July, 2010

At ITV News our fundamental purpose is to discover the truth and share it with our viewers.Yet there are rare occasions when we agree to put that aim on hold. Yesterday was one such occasion………..

..........We hate it when we can’t tell people everything we know. It goes against everything we stand for. But we also know that ITV viewers expect us to act responsibly. Over the last 24 hours that is what we have done. (a Raoul Moat story)

I think I'm starting to loose the will to live. Last dollop.

Keir Simmons 11 June, 2010

What is the job of journalism? It is to spread word, to ask questions, to hold to account – all of them noble principles. Which is fine in principle, the trouble is doing the job can be not very noble at all.

Because beyond the principles of journalism are real people, suffering real heartache. Their story may need to be shared with the nation, it may raise crucial questions that must be answered, but it is also their life.

A reporter should never forget that our stories aren’t just stories.
At ITV News we are daily faced with the challenge of reconciling our duty to report the story with our duty to care about the people we report on. The two do not always fit neatly together – far from it at times…………………..

……..And as ever – I will welcome your feedback as to whether we strike the right balance between the fair and the firm, the inquisitive and the intrusive. After all ITV News is, ultimately, about the people who watch us. source

Noble! bleedin' noble! principles of journalism! For fuck's sake! one of us needs locking up, but in the meantime, I've got me razor blades, got me box of matches, and all I need now is a busy intersection where I can play.

And let me leave you with this pearl, it is a permanent fixture in the side bar at Only in America.

I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude, and I believe most Iraqis express that. I mean, the people understand that we've endured great sacrifice to help them. That's the problem here in America. They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that's significant enough in Iraq.view 60 Minutes 1/14/07

Keir Simmons: John Blacksmith On a Role

2010-11-09T02:30:00.005Z

And ain't he just. Plus more below.

We just hate – but they know
by John Blacksmith

Despite the quote I gave from Boris Johnson, describing how he, a journalist and editor to his fingertips before he became mayor of London, now used Google as his primary source of information, poor old Keir Simmons just doesn’t get it, does he?

Let’s make allowances for his seriously gungy life’n’ style page heading – “How long, oh lord, how long?” – we all have a salary to earn after all - and treat the man as if he were a serious player with something to say worth analysing. An ITV newsman. I know, I know.

Good ol’ Keir’s case amounts to this:

He was in PDL in the twenty four hours after the disappearance. He is a journalist. He knows all about the case because he is a journalist and knows these things. He has decided that Gerry & Kate McCann are not just likeable, which he knows because they have let him get “close” to them, but beyond suspicion. We are cruel and wrong. He has spoken.

I mean, really.

Do you remember travel agents? There used to be a couple of them on every high street. They were people who were “experts” in travel. They rented an office and took perks from the people who were plugging hotels, resorts, car hire and the rest. Then they sat their arses in front of computer screens containing the schedules and prices – for flights, hotel rooms, whatever. And then they took your money and told you how to have a holiday. Experts, you know.

One day people suddenly started thinking, wait a minute, I can afford a computer now, I can look at the screen myself, instead of paying someone to look at it for me. Then they found out that the travel agent wasn’t really an expert at all, he was just reading from the screen. And then they clocked that all those special offers plugging certain holiday places weren’t kosher but were based on what nice Mr Travel Agent had been told, sold or perked. more

I've only just read this, the price of a day off I suppose. If you haven't already, enjoy.

My, how things can move
by John Blacksmith

This blog began when we discovered that the witness list for the Lisbon hearings in January this year had the Dirty Pair and their team staggering for the first time since October 2007.
There have been many ups and downs since that week when the lights burned late into the night while the group struggled to think of something – anything – that would help them cope with what was emerging. For the very first time the parents began to realise that amongst all the soap-opera phantoms they and their group had created – abductors, paedophiles, allies at the heart of government, all that tawdry Scouse fiction - there was somebody real: Goncalo Amaral was not only an enemy but a very dangerous one indeed. So dangerous that they couldn’t even discuss their deepest fears with Mitchell.

Always willing to help the Bureau pointed out to interested readers – and they included the loathsome Coffin – that, yes, Goncalo Amaral was engaged with them in a fight, a proper fight, not PR crap from people like Mitchell who’d only ever confronted real struggle as a voyeur from the media sidelines, not battles for a bigger NHS hospital budget from provincial doctors but a genuine fight that really – yes, really - was going to end with either he or they being destroyed.

The soap opera that they created is now being pushed aside by a genuine drama: not the cheapo version of their deprived imaginations but something as strange and disturbing as any No Country for Old Men script: a fight to the finish before our eyes.

And just as they struggled and gasped in January 2010 now, as things move towards the climax, they are struggling again but with fewer options and less hope.

The media suspect what is going on; some politicians have sensed what is happening and are quietly backing away from the case.The Bureau has, shall we say, a feeling about what is taking place. The supporters of the pair, however – there were 3 million plus of them when the fund was set up, 30 000 plus now – are out of the loop: bafflement has taken over.

Enjoy Lisbon, Gerry.