Tuesday, 24 January 2017

MCCANN CONSPIRACIES - THE LAST PHOTO



Of the many conspiracy theories surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, one of the most enduring seems to be the suggestion that Madeleine died much earlier in the week, there is no proof that she was alive after Sunday, the theorists claim.   

Goncalo Amaral and indeed his entire team of detectives who were there on the ground interviewing the actual witnesses, got it wrong apparently.  From the comfort of their armchairs, these deluded 'researchers'  believe they have solved this case because they have read the files.  Even putting aside that the PJ files were incomplete (much was held back), the files are nigh on 10 years old!  No-one can prove anything from these files, let alone a small group of group of deluded sleuths who think they have the genius to spot signs all the hundreds of REAL detectives who have worked on this case may have missed. 

Each works from the perspective of 'I'm a right, dead right', especially when flogging their delusional theories to the gullible.  They don't have the guts, humility, honesty and integrity to admit that the conclusions they reached 9+ years ago might be wrong.  They cannot accept that their square pegs just will not fit in round holes.  Two year olds learn this immediately and move on until they find a hole that fits.  Ten years on, this lot are still hammering away. 

I'm not sure if the Madeleine died on the Sunday idea sprung from Petermac and his interminable drivel about the last photo?  I actually stopped reading him many years ago, I have no time for the blinkered.  I know some, spend hours, days, weeks, etc pouring over photographs and the pyjamas, but to be honest, in a case littered with thousands of far more interesting 'tells', why focus on the trivia?  The Nightwear Job does a little too much surmising for my liking. Martin Roberts is filling the gaps on pyjama buying with what is going on in his own head.  He is projecting - a no no, in a scientific study, not something you would expect from someone with a doctorate.  Some 'experts' play fast and lose with 6 degrees of separation in this case, eg. Bennett:  Martin Smith is Irish and Catholic, so must be part of the McCann plot. 

Those pushing the theory that Madeleine died on the Sunday, or earlier in the week, expect us to believe that the child's body lay in the wardrobe for 5 days, while the parents and the rest of the group continued their holiday as if nothing had happened?  This is where reality leaves the building.  I apologise for being insensitive, but leaving a body in a wardrobe in a warm, humid climate, in an apartment where maids have access is beyond absurd.  Clearly, no specialist cadaver dogs would have been needed.  What kind of people would do that? And what kind of people would continue their holiday if a child from their party had died?  And for what reason?  They wanted their money's worth?  The very idea takes us to areas of macabre that would make even horror writers flinch. I know some will say they put on quite a performance on the Thursday, but that was a 'one night' only.  It wasn't every night and matinees. 

But let's indulge them for one moment.  If Madeleine died on the Sunday, the entire holiday party, including the kids and Fiona Payne's mother, must have been complicit.  This would have involved continuing with the tennis lessons, riding, days on the beach and high tea for 5 days after experiencing the worst tragedy of any of their lives.  Effectively, they would continue leaving the children alone each night, allegedly drugged, while they dined at the tapas bar? That is the very behaviour that led to the tragedy.  Many people, including the parents, suspected the McCann twins were drugged on the night Madeleine disappeared.  Now this is where I am asking the Sunday claimers to use a bit of logic and common sense.  Why on earth would the parents drug the twins (again)? And why on earth would they lay themselves open to charges of neglect (their biggest fear) for 5 nights in a row following a disaster?  

I agree they all put on a performance that night.  But it was like a hastily written Whitehall Farce, with more than a sniff of a 'make it up as you along' narrative.  Complete with clumsy memory recalls to fill in the gaps.  Gerry: 'Oh, that's right, I forgot, I didn't use my keys at all.  I went in the back doors which we always left open'.  It's a bit cringey to be honest and full of holes in the plotline.  How come 6 doctors and 3 administrators (constant notetakers) did not think to buy a notepad for their hastily prepared alibis on the night for example?

According to the Sunday claimers, the tapas group had 5 days lazing round the pool, eating tapas each night with apartments next to each other.  Why then did they make such a pigs ear of the Thursday night debacle?  They were all contradicting each other, Tannerman didn't appear until after the rush, and the mother didn't know about til the next morning!  How come Jane Tanner didn't say to the crowds of searchers 'a man carrying a child went that way'?

This was a group of educated, 'elite' people who only appeared to mix with their own kind.  Whilst they may appear to have drawn up a master plan to take over the Missing People industry, almost everything that happened to them, was the fickle finger of fate taking over.  They could not possibly have known for example, that their plight would cause such a global sensation. That's the thing with a hot news story, just as you are assured of front page coverage, an earthquate or a tsunami will strike on the other side of the world.  It really is down to the roll of the dice.

I truly believe the God complex took over this little group of elites.  They believed as British doctors, their word be taken immediately, and they would be above suspicion.  Instead of physically searching for their child, they were stirring up hostility against the local police and the PJ.  'No-one is helping us' they cried in phone calls back to the UK. They were I believe pleading for diplomatic immunity of some sort, who knows why, but Gerry's megalomania probably played a big part. 

In 10 years it appears as though nothing has happened in the Madeleine McCann case.  Some of us have been driven insane trying to work out the complexities, as if we were playing a particularly intense game of Cluedo. In the early days I studied the evidence just as much as every enthusiastic newbie, it was a case of well, I've started a 10,000 piece puzzle, now I will have to finish it, doh!  I once spent 3 weeks of my very busy (at the time) life, finishing an oil painting by numbers copy of Van Gogh's Sunflowers.  I cannot begin to tell you how many hours I spent on it each day, it got to the point where I hated the bleddy thing!  These kits should have warning signs :(  Abandoning it was never an option, it would have been failure.  I have to admit, finally completing it was a night of much celebration, but I have never attempted such a feat again!  Oops, that was a bit 'Freudian', here I am still commenting on McCann!  Doh! 

Those who claim Madeleine died earlier in the week, are discarding the evidence of Goncalo Amaral, the lead detective, and Madeleine's Avenger, who has spent the last 10 years defending his findings and those of the original investigation. At no time has he thanked Bennett, Petermac , Hall, HideHo or Textusa for enlightening him.  Nor indeed, have they received any thanks from Operation Grange, Government departments or anyone sane.  They are distorting the evidence to the extent that they making up diabolical back stories for the independent witnesses who's statements contradict their theories. As the divine Jeff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park '......never  questioning whether they should'. 

There is nothing wrong with anyone reconsidering their original stance, I consider it an admirable trait.  Each of us learn new facts and new perspectives every day. Considering other options opens the doors to enlightenment.  Intellectuals take the time to listen to and ponder new ideas, it is how they acquire more knowledge!  Those who insist they are right, dead right, are wearing blinkers, they have put up barriers to new information.  I don't mean on whether the parents were involved, I think 95% of the public now think that, but I mean on the more outlandish claims of swinging, child abuse and the ridiculous idea that Madeleine died on the Sunday.
Mostly through pride, they can't admit when they are wrong, or maybe because they are so bloody minded, if they are wrong the whole world makes no sense.  I must admit over the years, I have watched with amusement as these diehards nailed their masts to the flagpoles.  Their downfall is inevitable.  It may take years, or even decades, but it's inevitable.  

Those studying the last photograph with a microscope and a computer might like to consider for one moment the reasons why the parents may have released that particular photograph.  Could it be that at the time they were hard selling their image of a happy family on their hols?  If they want to dig deeper, why has Gerry got a face like a smacked arse?  Whilst those putting molecules under the microscope may be studying minutia that is only of interest to themselves and their niche audience, they are missing the bigger picture entirely. It's the equivalent of someone on Chilcott's team producing a report on the misuse of office stationary.  And besides, if someone produces video evidence of Madeleine being abducted by aliens, all their theories are tomorrow's recycled toilet paper.  Figuratively speaking, of course.  

    




Saturday, 21 January 2017

THE TRUMP INAUGURATION

I spent the entire day today watching the Trump inauguration, I don't know why, because his win sent me spiralling into a depression that I'm struggling to get out of. 

I've tried to treat this past few months like an episode of Black Mirror, maybe I will wake up with doctors leaning over me, saying, it's OK, she's back.  But that hasn't happened, the USA actually have elected their biggest loon to be President and Commander in Chief.  In a land brimming with talent and genius, they have somehow chosen an oversized Oompa Loompa with a bad hairdo as the leader of the free world.

To be honest, I wanted the whole inauguration to go badly, mean I know, but my hatred of Trump goes beyond reasoned or rational.  And I wasn't disappointed.  As much as Kay Burley tried to give the impression of cheering crowds, apart from clusters here and there, Washington looked like a ghost town.  She did manage to find a couple of chilled out bad ass Bikers for Trump, the 'meat' who were welcomed into town by the President himself with a tweet, just in case law and order broke down.  Going by their peace and love message, I suspect they were partaking of the free weed being handed out, rather than their own stash of crystal meth.  Perhaps they are keeping that for a punch up tomorrow. 

Up on the podium, it was a sombre crowd, missing was the excitement, hope and good cheer that a new era should hold.  There were few smiles, more funeral than celebration.  And it's got to be said, the music, if you can call it that, was Goddam awful, the words 'make it stop' sprung to mind.  Even Jackie Evancho was terrible, her heart wasn't in it, and sitting in the rain for 2 hours probably didn't help.  I could see from the pained expressions on the senators' faces, that I was not alone.  That Mr. 'I want to do everything' probably chose it himself scares the bejesus out of me.  If his advisors won't tell him his choice in music is shit, what will they say, when he insists on nuking Syria? 

Hilary, bless her, smiled through gritted teeth, not just because of fear for the world, but because the job that should have been hers had been stolen from her, not just by an orange clown, but assisted by a hostile foreign power.  To be honest I don't know which explanation I prefer.  The American people, who I have always loved, voted for a fascist monster with the potential to out Hitler the Fuhrer.  Ie.  Day 1, Build up US weapons, Close Borders, Round up Aliens, or that a hostile super power can fix a US election.   

But let's get personal.  In the case of Donald Trump, ethics go out the window.  The Donald is as fascinating a subject as any of my others, his behaviour is almost textbook, narcissist sociopath, the traits so extreme, they are almost caricature. 

Narcissists are riddled with paranoia, they rarely smile because their heads are buzzing with suspicion, everyone is out to get them.  They can't brush jokes off, because those jokes expose the fears they try so hard to keep hidden.  Trump doesn't forgive and forget, he seeks vengeance.  Some might see his trophy wives and dalliances with beauty contestants and hookers as a form of revenge. Payback to all the bullies who laughed at him in the showers.  Look at me now.

I would like to say as a feminist, that I have sympathy for Melania.  But I don't. I have little time for women who make their appearance their life's work. Watching the old presidents, Jimmy Carter, George Bush and Bill Clinton walking down the podium stairs with equally old wives, separates the men from the misogynists.  They have chosen as their partners, and stayed with, women of the same intellectual level and maturity.  Trump, like most men, or women, who choose much younger or less educated partners than themselves, want control, someone easy to impress, who will believe pretty much anything they are told.  Grown ups know this.  Trump believes having a super model on his arm makes him look macho and virile, and he can't understand why the lads in the locker room are still laughing. 

Most of the Trump family look and act like automatons.  Born into a life of opulence and privilege, Trump is raising an army of 'mini me's' and already he is placing them in positions of power.  The two sons with their slicked back hair, look like prototypes for American Psycho, and the proud way in which the cowardly beasts with their guns, display the corpses of the beautiful and often endangered animals that they kill, makes them just like daddy.  As for the golden child Ivanka, her beauty doesn't come from within.  She must be aware of her father's shady business practices that have made other companies go bust and workers without pay.

I applaud all those democrats who stayed away yesterday, and all those protesters who showed dissent.  In treating madness as normal, it becomes normal.  In studying WWII, I couldn't fathom why the German people were able to adapt to such evil ideology.  I don't want to be unfair on the German people, the chances are, they were probably no different to electorates all over the world - that is, the majority are too apathetic to challenge the system.  The most shocking part for me was how easy it became to look away from the atrocities carried out by the Third Reich. 

On his first day in office Trump addressed the world.  He has already given the go ahead to invest in more arms, he wants the borders closed and work to begin on that wall.  Another first week promise was the rounding up of illegal aliens, and so it begins.  Will they be holed up in internment camps or set adrift in leaky boats?  What will he have to do before the sane among those leading senators, churchmen and holders of high office, to realise that their new emperor is not only naked, he has the power to take out entire nations at a whim, especially if they take the piss out of his hair.  No pun intended. 

Those treating Trump and his fucked up white supremacist policies as 'normal' will be complicit in the atrocities to come, and sure as eggs is eggs they will.  When Hitler put it to his cabinet that they should round up all the Jews and undesirables, no-one cared.  Why because they had been indoctrinated with negative spin and rabble rousing rhetoric.  It was easier not to rock the boat or make waves, because given his temperament, Adolf was likely to mellow and give up on his dream of wiping out entire races and taking over the world. 

For Donald Trump, Muslims are this century's Jews.  He has declared war on ISIS.  Not a good move, even George W. Bush raised his eyebrows at that one.  Really Donald?  Is taunting the best way to keep terrorism away from American soil?  The problem is Donald is so ill informed on, well everything, that ISIS and ISLAM are the same thing.  He doesn't seem to understand that you can get extreme hate filled Muslims, just as you can get extreme hate filled Christians.  Religion does that to some people.  Those extreme activists are not representative of our Muslim friends and neighbours who live and work alongside us. 

Trump is trying to cause disharmony where there isn't any, and like every rich, man before him, he is blaming poverty, injustice and hunger on a minority group, so that nobody will notice he is actually stashing everything away for himself. It's not me hoarding all gold and riches and food, it's the greedy stranger asking for a crust of bread.  

Greed isn't good.  It doesn't work.  It invariably brings misery and hardship, the only way to turn a healthy profit is to exploit others, and that I fear is Mr. Trump's only area of expertise.  Only this time he won't just be exploiting the native Americans of Atlantic City, or all the builders and labourers working on his bankrupt projects, he will be exploiting an entire nation.    

I have to say, I was troubled by the amount of religion packed into yesterday's service.  Has the Donald been known as a bible basher?  Methinks he is trying to win over the evangelical Republicans, who didn't get the candidate they wanted. He is also giving a middle finger to the celebrities and liberals, by pretending he prefers church choirs to sassy rock stars.     

I'm glad Donald Trump and his family didn't get the huge crowds and the huge welcome that was given to Barack Obama.  They aren't loved by the people because they have never done anything for the people, and probably never will. They see only further enrichment for themselves.  Their patriarch, the most spoilt kid in the world has got his greedy little hands on the biggest prize.  He is a PROPERTY DEVELOPER who has just torn up every climate change agreement entered into by his predecessor.  How long before there is a Trump tower selling Trump beer and Trump burgers on every street corner all over the globe?  When a megalomaniac says he wants to be US President and then actually becomes US President, anything is possible.   

Those who say Tump's speech was generic, the same grandiose promises from the election trail weren't listening.  He has found an audience for his madcap ideas and he will give them what they want, no matter how cruel or inhumane their demands are.  Happily, that audience is shrinking, it wasn't only the stars who stayed away, it was the people.  All those sane leaders and thinkers on that podium yesterday really need to get together as quickly as possible before the hiccup in their democratic process turns into a global disaster. 

Sunday, 15 January 2017

LET'S STICK WITH THE REAL CRIMES

Those who have been following my blogs over the past couple of weeks are saying that I have changed, that I have gone over to the 'dark side' and that I am now supporting Kate and Gerry McCann.  Some have been concerned (Ok, one person, thank you Liz) that I am having some sort of mental breakdown, that I'm not myself. Unfortunately, as I have multiple personalities, I'm not sure which one of us she means.  I jest, it's not necessarily a diagnosis I agree with, I think we all have different 'characters' for different situations and most of us can keep the mad ones hidden for most of the time.  

But it would be true to say I have been hurt.  I have written about the Madeleine case for many years, despite the severe detrimental effect it has had on my writing career and my reputation.  Why? because I hate injustice, and because a child shouldn't just disappear with seemingly no questions asked of those who had care of her.  

I'm not generally a bullet point maker, but on this occasion I will make an exception, because I want to highlight the issues in this case that keep me here and keeps me putting my neck on the line for justice.

1.  Responsible Parenting 

When Gerry was asked if there were any lessons to be learned, he replied with many words, but basically, 'yes, we didn't do anything wrong'. Wrong Answer! Not only were the suspects claiming they did nothing wrong, but so too were the dozy mares on breakfast TV and in the newspaper columns. 

There were of course vital lessons to be learned, lessons that were totally ignored in order not to hurt the parents feelings.  Children die, and that's heartbreaking, but the only way to make any sense of a child's death is to try to make something good come out of it.  That is, do everything in our power to prevent the same thing happening to another child. 

The Abductor, Child Predator, story was false.  Not only has it cost two governments millions, it has been used to scare parents into having their kids microchipped and demanding a national DNA databank.  The whole debacle created a budding new corporation and enriched existing charities. 

The issue of the McCanns and the Tapas group leaving their children on their own has not only been swept under the carpet, the government have built a flyover on it.  All those millions of tabloids sold in the name of Madeleine, were not warning their readers about the dangers of leaving toddlers unattended, they were all but putting out posters saying your child could be next.  It has created a culture where this generation are confined to their bedrooms eating pizza.  It breaks my heart that so many children today have so little freedom.  They are being indoctrinated to live in fear - the message, there is a predator behind every lamp post has been this century's best seller.  

Accidents in the home are the biggest danger for toddlers, and that is a lesson that should have been stressed over and over.  Ironic as this may sound, in the 1980's I watched a child safety documentary presented by Jimmy Savile.  As a new and pretty clueless young mum, I learned more in that hour than I could have in a hundred books. 

2.  The involvement of the 'Establishment'  

No matter which way you look at this case, the original investigation was scuppered by the interference of the UK (New) Labour government.  Since taking Goncalo Amaral off the case in September 2007, the case has not moved so much as inch forward. If Scotland Yard or the PJ make the slightest move towards the Mr and Mrs, an entire house of cards comes tumbling down.  It is abundantly clear they had lots of help, a fair few perverting the course of justice in a criminal investigation. 

To myself, and no doubt to many who have followed this case throughout, we can see the enormity of the crimes, and we are astonished today as we were 10 years ago, that nobody seems to care.  Unfortunately, huge miscarriages of justice occur daily, some, such as Hillsborough will never be forgotten because their supporters, bless them, will never give up on their loved ones and the appalling, spiteful decisions that led to their deaths.  Ninety six people died at Hillsborough, and the establishment's involvement in the cover up was 96 times greater.  This is just one small girl.

While the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance has the potential to grab world headlines, it has fallen way down the ladder, it is competing with so many sensational stories, cover ups, financial scandals, and a raving lunatic as US President, that it is unlikely ever to get the same attention again.  The zeitgeist has changed, human interest stories have been replaced by glitz and celebrity, not a path available to the pap loving McCanns. 

Will those responsible ever stand trial?  Despite all I have said above, there is still a glimmer of hope.  Operation Grange remains live, so too, as far as I know, does the PJ investigation.  The PJ of course, were quick enough to shelve the case in 2008 when they realised they did not have enough to prosecute, and they were adamant for several years that they would not 're-open' the file without new evidence.  That it is still 'live' in Portugal should mean something.

Before moving onto the next point, I would like to be clear about my sympathy for Kate McCann.  Yes I feel sorry for Kate, as I would for anyone in a wretched situation, even if that wretched situation is of their own making.  I guess I am one of the few people who wept when Saddam Hussein was dragged out of his bunker, stripped and beaten to death. 

I have stated again and again, that Law, Order and Retribution are really not my thing.  I am interested in crime because I study human behaviour, my quest is enlightenment.  The punishment part, not so much, OK, not at all.  It is an issue where I spend much of my time with my head in the sand.  It is not to say that I don't feel that anger and rage, I do, the face of Ian Huntley for example, incenses me, I don't think I could see him in the flesh without attacking him.

Now what I am about to say will infuriate my enemies even more, but Kate is not in the same category as monsters such as Ian Huntley or Mark Bridger, she is a mother for whom something went desperately wrong. Gerry was being truthful when he said 'there's been a disaster'.  That is she didn't kill her child for any sort of gratification, sexual or otherwise.  If there was a crime that night, it was a crime of passion.  Not premeditated or with malice aforethought.

The interim report of Tavares de Almeida concludes Madeleine died in the apartment and the parents did not want to give up the body. Anything else regarding the events of that evening is pure conjecture.  There is no mention of paedophile gangs, and no mention of orgies going on in the resort. 
  
The premeditated, malice aforethought crimes began in the aftermath, with the hiding of the body and the misinformation they were giving to the police and the media.  Far from going into a panic, they went into overdrive, their methodical scientific minds, planning not only ways in which to avoid any form of prosecution, but also ways in which to make a fortune. 

Though the financial crimes are whitecollar, they are just as damaging to their victims.  Millions in cash and resources has been diverted from genuine charities and genuine missing people.  People have been misled, taken for fools.  But the cruellest of their actions has been against Goncalo Amaral.  They have gone above and beyond to destroy his career and reputation, not because they were thinking about their daughter, but because they wanted vengeance. 

Had they confessed that night that there had been a terrible accident and that they were sorry they left the kids, they probably would have received compassion.  The public hatred for Kate and Gerry grew out of their lack of remorse - they have never blamed themselves, they have always blamed others.  But on top of that, they always looked so darn smug.  'What do you do if there is a sighting?' a reporter asked Gerry in the early days.  From the expression on his face, his first answer should have been 'try not to giggle', the second was 'not take them too seriously'.  Ie. the complete opposite of what you would expect from the father of a missing child.  They blame Goncalo Amaral, but their own expressions have told their story throughout. 

I don't think Kate deliberately killed her child.  Ergo, it is only natural that she would be bereaved.  I agree that didn't look like the case in the summer of 2007, both she and her husband thrived in the Portuguese sun, and that I think is something many of us find hard to forgive.  I can't because it shows a shallowness of feeling towards the child that reveals narcissism.  Any child, and there are many, who grew up with a narcissistic mother will have a deprived childhood.  Not in the sense of being deprived of food, warmth, or even suffering physical punishment, but in the withholding of affection, preference given to siblings and of course, jealousy. The narcissist mother will be jealous of the child who takes away attention that should belong to her.

Narcissistic mothers are so common, it doesn't count as abuse per se.  The child may grow up with self esteem issues, but they are just as likely to grow up twice as strong.  Little Madeleine I think, would have been the latter, as her nan said, 'that girl could throw a tantrum'.  The snippets we do know about Madeleine, show that she was not an abused child.  She had a wide vocabulary (always an indicator), she was outgoing and not afraid to stamp her feet.  Abused children have few words, and what they do have, they are afraid to use.

I want to see Kate and Gerry stand trial for every crime they have committed, but I don't see the need for internet researchers to make up a few more. Especially when the heinous crimes they are alleging, directly affect the lives of the children involved.  Kate would have be an automaton if she were not suffering now, the pain and stress is etched into her face.  Some might say she deserves it, myself too on occasion, but we are not Judge and Jury, nor are we law enforcers.  Right now there are a small number of people who have reached a verdict and are handing out their own form of punishment on social media, that makes me very uncomfortable. 

Monday, 9 January 2017

WHY THE CSA INQUIRY IS BOLLOX

As for the CSA Inquiry etc - all BOLLOX. The majority of the child abuse that went on in the 60s/70s/80s, was carried out by employees of local authorities who had care and control of vulnerable children.  That is, orphans and those rescued or seized from 'dysfunctional' families.    

In the orphanages, the religious institutions, approved schools and the childrens' homes,  abuse was common day to day practice.  By their very nature these care homes were designed to attract the very worst of human behaviour. Can you imagine the paedophiles, the sadists and the psychopaths salivating as they read the job description?  'you will often have sole day to day and pastoral care of 12 children of different ages who have no parents or anyone who will believe a word they say'.  Every industry attracts psychopaths, but sadly, the care industry more than most.     

But here's a thing, and here's why the CSA Inquiry is bollox.  Of all the abuse that was inflicted on children in care, the Government, the MSM, all the do gooders and even the public (because they are being steered that way), have focussed on the titillating SEXUAL abuse.  And let me be honest here, those of us who were being battered and forced to scrub floors through the night, envied that tiny few who were being groomed and showered with privileges. 

Abuse was rife during those decades because all the cogs were in place to support it.  Every society, even the richest, has vulnerable citizens to take care of - and they will usually opt for the cheapest and most inhumane method as long as it looks as though they are doing their duty.  Which is where the Church steps in.  Not only did they relieve the local councils of their burden, they vowed to rehabilitate the offspring of the undeserving poor and turn out obedient citizens with a healthy respect for authority. 

The Child SEXUAL Abuse will never focus on the real abuse that was going on, because those floodgates would turn into a tsumani.  Basically, it is saying, it is OK to whip children, lock them in cupboards, make them wear rags and degrade them, but for fuck's sake don't embrace them.  It should all be laughable, because it is the deviant far right, trying to out deviant the even further far right. 

So far the armies of 'investigators' are only interested in targets who's names will attract tabloid headlines.  If the dirty old git who stuck his hand up your kilt, hasn't had at least a one man show, forget it.  And we're not interested in the bus driver who said you had nice tits when you were 12 either.  However, if the perp has any connection to a political party whatsoever, even leafletting, pull up a chair.  

For the survivors who have come forward, there is nothing in it for them but a continuation of their trauma and pain.  There won't be any payouts, there won't be any 'justice'.  At the moment, they are being used as willing pawns in a very sick game, the only healing they will get, will be in using that 'sixth sense' to help protect others.

Zero children are being protected by this ongoing money pit,  and God knows there are enough kids desperately in need right now.  Nothing will be learned because the investigators are ignoring the bleeding obvious.  The authorities, all of them, placed the care of their most vulnerable children into the hands of psychopaths,  Some of whom were sexually attracted to children, but most were bog standard sadists. 

The only lesson to be learned from the entire sorry saga, is that carers, not just of children, but also of the elderly and the disabled should be psychology screened during the interview process and the means to do this already exist. Anyone who has ever worked in the care industry will have encountered
co-workers (happily a minority), who's attitude towards their clients was less than humane. Unhappily for me, and I am sure many, my constant challenging of 'rules' and whistleblowing, cut short my own, much loved, employment as a  support worker.  I tried to do as a co-worker, good friend, and very wise woman advised, which was, not make waves, because ultimately the clients wouldn't have us anymore.  We sort of felt that our being good, would make up for the bad, and I'm sure a lot of carers out there will recognise that sentiment. 

In the above instance, the system beat me.  They broke me, quite literally, made me question my own sanity.  I survived because I turned to the internet and read everything I could on 'bullying in the workplace'.  Without any hesitation, I thank those brave enough to tell their stories, and the analysts and psychologists for explaining it.  At some point I will give an account of the experience, tis a struggle though, the memory still has the power to traumatise me!  Mostly guilt, because I felt as though I had abandoned those dear, sweet people I cared so much about.

But I digress.  Seeking out those aged, and probably infirm, abusers is pointless.  They were taking advantage of the system that existed at that time.  Hopefully, throughout the rest of their miserable lives, they were never able to hold such positions of power again.

The CSA Inquiry, are not making headlines such as 'Fred the Milkman, age 89 once exposed his John Thomas to a schoolgirl', because apart from a few old biddies saying 'Ooer, 'ave you read about old Fred, what was he like, ha ha', nobody could care less.  Some might say that's because Fred the Milkman didn't work in childcare.  But isn't it also possible, and far more likely, that the victims were also abused by people who didn't work in childcare, who weren't once famous, or who never held political office?  Are those memories less traumatic, equally traumatic, more traumatic, or inconsequential?

Wednesday, 4 January 2017

SMUT IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

UPDATE  13.01.17

#McCann Hashtag Scum

As I watched the Donald Trump press conference, I thought there is a man who has been totally humiliated and he is as mad as hell. 

I thought much the same as I read the avalanche of abuse aimed at me this morning on the McCann hashtag.  Pointing out that all the sicko deviant sex allegations actually come from their own twisted heads was never going to go down well, but heck, someone had to. 

That I am not popular with the baying mob on twitter, bothers me not a jot.  In fact I would be worried if I were.  I am delighted to say I have absolutely zilch in common with any of them, all their words and actions are based on pure hate - reason, logic and humanity, have long since left the building. 

It's ironic to see the sanctimonious claim that they are 'thinking of the children', especially on the McCann hashtag which is devoted entirely to ripping the twins' lives apart.  They squeeze out crocodile tears as they claim to be 'doing it all for Maddie', a 3 year old who died years ago, and who wouldn't want their kind of help anyway.  'We vow to make your parents and siblings suffer every day for the next 10 years+', yeh, she would have loved that. 

Most don't have the guts to reveal their real names and faces.  Understandable, daily hate mongering is hardly a noble profession and they have much to be ashamed of.  As thick as they are, they know they are universally despised, and quite rightly, they are not seeking justice, they want blood.  They are the scabby unwashed who fight for front row seats at the scaffold, salivating as the axe comes down.  The McCanns are not human apparently, but then neither are they.   

I believe beyond reasonable doubt that the abduction was faked and the McCanns and all those involved in the cover up should stand trial.  And by that I mean a real trial, not the kangaroo Courts of the Madeleine forums, facebook pages and twitter. 

Tony Bennett, Richard Hall and Peter Hyatt are dirty old men successfully selling the contents of their filthy one track minds to those dedicated 'truth seekers' on twitter.  That their accusations have little to do with reality, and even less to do with Madeleine's disappearance, matters not, it's the kind of stick designed to cause maximum pain to this family so they happily go with it. 

As for those in a frenzy on the #McCann hashtag, you repulse me as much as you repulse any sane person who looks at that tag. You are not there for justice, you are there for punishment and retribution, and you are dishing it out yourselves in your daily game of taunting and spreading hatred.  How does that help Maddie or any of the children involved?

One final word.  My pen is my sword, I can take down any one of you anytime I choose.  My dear old dad used to say to me 'don't destroy someone just because you can'.  His words have saved your batshit crazy gang thus far, but don't depend on them, in certain cases I will happily make an exception. 




UPDATE 10/01/17


I am now universally despised by more antis than pros in this case.  I can't say I am particularly bothered, both the pros and the antis are way over represented by the psychopaths, the criminally insane and the plain old sanctimonious. One well known journalist I know remarked that they were the most despicable people he/she had ever encountered. 

There are many good and honourable reasons why the victim in this case should have justice.  So too Goncalo Amaral who was assigned the task of finding the child.  But there have been other victims, and I include myself here, who's names and reputations have been deliberately tarnished for pointing out the deceit that has been going on. 

And the deceit is coming from both sides!  All those poised with pen in hand ready to publish when the shit hits the fan, are scratching around for a USP, Unique Selling Point.  Sex sells.  I will admit, it's omission from my own memoir contributed to it's lack of popularity.  No graphic sex scenes and nothing embellished, it was doomed. 

Regardless, I personally won't accept anything less than the truth.  Disliking a person is not proof of, almost unheard of, heinous sex crimes against children. I do wonder if the finger pointers are descendants of Salem's finest.  The fact that it is extremely unlikely and no-one else can see the demons, matters not.  Little Maddie with make up on, and the beautiful face and the exposed nipple of a 12 year old are the work of the Devil! They are all 'Signs', doncha know. 

Those who are still battling off reason and logic, should ponder for a moment. What would be the most logical reason for doctors, holidaying with doctors, not wanting to give up the body of a child who died accidently or otherwise?

1.  An overdose of miscalculated drugs. 
2.  Deviant child sex involving the Labour Cabinet, Clement Freud, Cliff Richard and MI5 (or is it 6?), Barack Obama and the Pope. I have to say, Bennett's suggestion that Clarence Mitchell was top level secret service was one of those laugh out loud moments. 

I would advise careful thought and consideration before selecting an answer.  Perhaps even putting down the glass, the bible and/or quit the self flagellating for a few moments.  Which of the two above, is more likely?  Therein lies the road back to sanity. 





UPDATE 09/01/17


I see the God of all hellfire (Bennett) has revived an ancient thread giving 60 reasons why the pictures of Madeleine in make up were/are deviant.  The 60 reasons are a selection of comments found by Bennett online that support his own twisted imagination and agenda.  And in this instance, he fully supports the views of Mark Williams-Thomas, another 'expert' who interpreted pictures of 3 year old Madeleine as sexually provocative.  There are a few dissenting voices on the thread, those who point out how nonsensical the Lolita idea is, but they are deemed the deviants and the paedophile appeasers and most have disappeared never to be seen again. 

_____________________________________


It is a common theory among most the 'antis' that the pictures of Madeleine McCann dressed up by her Mummy as a Princess, are somehow sinister and contain sexual overturns.  And just to be clear as to what Pointy Finger number 1 is implying he has helpfully entitled one of the photographs 'Picture 2 - Madeleine dressed up by an adult as 'Lolita''.  I'll give the sane among my readers, a few moments to allow that chill running down their spines to settle as they contemplate those words.  Especially those wannabe statement analysts. 

Who the fuck thinks like that!  And many thanks to the correspondents on my previous blog for highlighting these grotesque, and spiteful accusations. This blog is dedicated to Kate McCann herself, I hope she is looking in.  Don't worry about wasting money on lawyers Kate, I'm about to pulverise the little rat on your behalf. 

Mothers and daughters have played dressing up since time began Mr. Bennett, it is one of those milestones in our lives that leaves us with precious memories to enjoy in our old age.  Kate is a  mother who lost her daughter, she will have fewer memories than most, it is beyond cruel of you and others to make such disgusting and vindictive accusations.  It is spite, pure and simple, nothing is to be gained by implying that those innocent snaps of Madeleine are evidence of abuse!  All these evil and heinous accusations serve only to add to this mother's pain. 

So what if an adult put Madeleine's necklace, why the need for shock for awe? Ditto the eyeliner and eyeshadow.  Again, so what?  Going by Bennett's criteria, is every mother who helps her daughter put on bangles, necklace, ear rings etc, a child abuser?  Or is that particular twist of the knife reserved for Kate McCann alone?  My mother would spend ages backcombing my air and I have treasured pictures to prove it.  Is a 4 year old with the high hair of Dusty Springfield appropriate?  I didn't have daughters, but I provided my 8 year old son with masking tape and lollypop sticks so he could make his own 'Freddie Kruger' hand, what does that say about me? 

You are a complete dumbarse Bennett, and a very spiteful one at that.  You have zero understanding of human nature, and not so much as a smidgeon of compassion in you.  How dare you take this poor mother's precious memories and degrade them with your own murky fantasies.  Who, other than yourself, sees a picture of 3 year old dressed up as a Princess and obviously having fun with her mummy, as a 'Lolita' ffs?   And Lolita  by the way, was a pubescent girl reaching a sexual awakening, not a toddler.   

As for the way in which Madeleine is posing (jeez, I can't believe I am even responding to it), has he ever tried to photograph a 3 year old?  They very rarely keep still and stand on their heads whenever the mood grabs them,  which is  fairly often. The bouncing, skipping Maddie with her siblings in the hallway demonstrates what a happy, confident little girl she was.  Why go to so much trouble to 'prove' that she wasn't?  What is in it for you Bennett et al, other than the satisfaction of knowing that you have added pain to a family who are still grieving.  Applying reason and logic, what mother on this earth, would dress their child up for the delectation of online perverts?  Is it not enough for you that Gerry and Kate have lost their daughter? 

I hate to think what goes on in the imaginations of those who point the finger.  Especially those who insist this case involves some form of deviant sex.  In the case of Pointy Finger 1, Bennett, we have the most heinous of crimes known to man and beast, sex with children. And Pointy Finger 2, Textusa, insists PDL was a den of iniquity filled with  bed hopping not seen since the days of ancient Rome. 

Pointy finger 2, you can laugh off.  It has an air of a Carry On film or a Whitehall farce, where the man inadvertently ends up in bed with the mother in law.  Pointy finger 2 however is just sick and deserves to be scorned and rebutted as the pure hatred it is. 

These dirty allegations, and they are pure dirt derive purely from the minds of those who are emotionally immature and unable to understand sexual  dynamics.  Their need to protect children makes no sense whatsoever, when you consider that there is a live investigation and real children are very much being affected by what is said online.  People like Bennett, Hall, Textusa, Hyatt, Frances Gallagher, should hang their heads in shame at the pure venom they are trying to stir up.

Those making up those odious claims should have the contents of their shit heads hurled right back at them.  And I urge all those on the blogs, forums and facebook pages to challenge them outright on where their sicko imaginary scenarios come from.  What mother would use her little girl to titillate perverts? All those disgusting connotations come from their own minds, nowhere else.  There are no precedents because it has never actually happened.

The majority of adults, including the McCanns and their friends, get on fine with their equals, they don't shrink in the presence of the opposite sex or other adults they are attracted to.  They have no need or desire to prey on noisy, often smelly, toddlers.  I mean seriously.  Given the option, an evening with interesting, entertaining, like minded friends and good food and wine.  Or an evening in an apartment with screaming, demanding kids who won't give you a minute's peace for love nor money? Have these accusers never met a toddler?

Sex and control go hand in hand (especially after watching Borgia).  We all (secretly) set out to conquer the object of our desire.  The battle can go on for years, if we are lucky, it makes the world go around. There is no kudos in seducing a child.  No doors opening, no financial reward, no admiration from peers.  No pats on the back or praise for pulling the 4 year old.  On the career and ambition front, it is taboo, a dirty little secret that will always have the power to destroy.  So Mr. Bennett, why would a group of successful, upwardly mobile group of professionals be involved in the sickest and most heinous crime know to man and womankind?


Happy New Year Kate.  You're welcome.

Sunday, 1 January 2017

HAPPY NEW YEAR



Happy new year to all my readers old and new, thank you for sticking with me, and thank you for returning again and again.  Just to pee my enemies off, I am absolutely chuffed with the way my blog has developed.  It has survived all the pettiness and squabbles that caused most of the other groups and forums to self combust.  I've never been in the slightest bit bothered about trolls, troublemakers and disrupters, and I am happy to publish alternate opinions as long as they are not littered with abuse and insults. 

As should be clear, I cannot and will not be censored, and I don't want to censor anyone else.  This hasn't led to anarchy or a need for a panic room, the opposite in fact, this is one of the few places in the niche Madeleine world where alternate theories and opinions are welcome.  I'm desperate to know what others think, which is why my blog is interactive.  Far from being upset when I am proved wrong, I am grateful to be enlightened.  One of my favourite, and oft used phrases is 'you know, I never thought about it like that before'. 

The part of me that wants to believe in the good of human nature, would like to be proved wrong in the Madeleine case.  The last few remnants of Catholic would like the burden taken away, It would be nice to go back prior to that summer of 2007, when the world appeared to be more stable and Western governments less corrupt.  This case is so much more than a little girl who went missing, and hopefully one day, all those who used her name and face so unscrupulously will be held to account.

Meanwhile, I have been trying to put off 2017, hiding under the duvet won't make it go away.  I am not so much concerned about Brexit, I actually wanted to stay until I saw how much it mean't to ace turncoat Owen Smith, now I think Out is right.  Much, much, worse, is that that the USA have, incredibly, elected a raving lunatic as  their next President.  It's kinda like the UK voting in Benny Hill. A slobbering letch with bad hair chasing scantily clad lingerie models. 

And it's not just that Donald Trump has been elected the next US President, it is the fact that his 'greed is good' philosophy is spreading like a plague throughout the world as we are seeing a rise of the far Right not seen since the 1930's.  Centre politics won't defeat them because they have more in common with them than the Left.  When given the choice, Mr. 'Centre' himself, Nick Clegg, chose hard right tories over wishy washy Blairites. 

Anyway, enough of the soapbox, my warmest wishes to all my readers and thank you so much for your interesting and insightful contributions.  I am always grateful to anyone who takes the time and trouble to comment, the interesting points you raise gives me much to discuss, many thanks.

Happy New Year!   

Saturday, 24 December 2016

MOTIVE FOR A COVER UP

Like many I found the two Jonbenet Ramsey documentaries totally mesmerizing, it is a case that has fascinated me for years.  For those unfamiliar with the Jonbenet case, the details were almost a prototype for the Madeleine McCann mystery that was to come. 

Just like the Madeleine case, an exceptionally beautiful child was stolen from her bed in the night, but in Jonbenet's case, her brutalised body was to turn up in the basement.  The first cries of Patsy Ramsey were, my daughter's been kidnapped [and just to prove it], there's a ransom note.  The first cries of Kate McCann were my daughter's been taken, [and just to prove it] the bedroom window is open.  Both mothers are clearing themselves with their opening lines. And it could be said, with statements, and/or actions that they personally have prepared. 

It could be argued that both Patsy and Kate were acting like ferocious mummy tigers.  As a bit of an FMT myself, there have been times when my kids have been in danger or I have perceived them to be in danger.  Times when the fog lifts and I have sprung into action to protect my young.  Times even when I would have signed a deal with the devil himself without bothering to look at the small print.  I certainly would not have sat around weeping, wailing and planning my own defence. 

The problem I have with the weeping and wailing, especially the throwing of himself on the floor by Gerry, is that it simply doesn't ring true.  We are all genetically programmed with survival skills, if we weren't we wouldn't be here. In traumatic situations, our thinking becomes clearer and more determined. That flood of adrenaline enables us to catch the baby before he/she falls on the floor or attempts to drink bleach.  We don't go all fuzzy as the T-rex approaches us, we get the feck out of the way.  The actions of the educated Kate, Gerry and Patsy Ramsey are contrary to human or even animal behaviour.  Our first instincts when our young go missing is to look for them.  For Kate and Gerry, emergency medical situations were part of their vocation.  While the rest of us faint at the sight of blood, a medical professional will stem the artery, we don't expect to see them out cold alongside us.   

And given Gerry's, err let's say, controlling disposition, one thing I have never been able to understand is why he didn't demonstrate his organising abilities with the search parties.  His time, and the time of his wife were, apparently better spent on SOS phone calls to influential people in the UK.  Not the actions of a father desperate to find his daughter, but the actions of a father desperate to hold onto his remaining kids and his reputation perhaps? 

John Bennett wanted to go ahead with his planned flight on Boxing Day, the private plane was at the ready.  He clearly wanted to get his wife and son away from the scene, tellingly he said in an interview, he never spent another night in that house.  Like Gerry, he was not concerned with finding his daughter's kidnapper/ killer, he was protecting his remaining family.

Poor little Jonbenet died on Christmas night according to her tombstone.  The amazing experts who worked on the two documentaries, analysed every part of the evidence in detail.  For myself, I was already beyond reason doubt stage, it was the 3 page ransom note that did it, but I leaned towards the 'unstable mother' findings of Steve Thomas (Jonbenet's Avenger) rather than the theory that the 9 year old brother did it.  I simply couldn't believe that a 9 year old could be physically strong enough or indeed wicked enough, to strike a fatal blow to his sister's head.

After watching both documentaries, I am back to the drawing board.  I then went onto watching the interview with Burke Ramsey and Dr. Phil that included interviews with Burke as a child.  I won't analyse him other than to say he was more than capable of being part of a secret, 'if I did, I wouldn't tell you' he said as a 9 year old.  The adult Burke made uncomfortable viewing.  He was clearly socially awkward and highly defensive, both of himself and his parents.  He was an overprotected child who has grown into an overprotected adult - he has sworn allegiance to his protectors.   

But here's a thing, and it's a statement from last night's superb documentary that made me stop and sit up straight.  What is strong enough to motivate a mother to lie, scheme and plot to the extent that mothers Patsy and Kate are perceived to have done.  Plots so sinister and machiavellion they could be straight out of the dark crime section on the bookshelves.  Such stories are not without basis, history and literature is littered with plotting mums determined to place their little soldiers on the throne.  Figuratively speaking of course.  Neither Patsy nor Kate could protect the daughters they lost, and that kind of pain would drive a mother to do literally anything to protect the children she still has, even to the point of madness. 

It could be argued that everything Patsy, Kate and their husbands have done, has been done to protect their surviving children.  Ie. that's it.  No titillating swinging scene, no paedophile gangs, no government VIPs being flown out of PDL in helicopters, no deep dark secrets. 

Whist the way in which these adults have protected their children is indeed questionable, it is capable of being understood.  Some might say they went way above and beyond, in the ferocity of their fight, and the accumulation of vast wealth and government protection.  That their altruistic motive of 'protecting the kids' was overtaken by fundraising and their own need for public recognition. 

But let's not be churlish.  Tis the season of goodwill, and maybe a good time for many among the antis to consider for one moment that everything the McCanns have done, has been driven by their love for their children.  No dark, sinister motive.  It doesn't excuse their actions, and it doesn't make them right, but it does make them human.

Merry Christmas everyone, I now have a mountain of sprouts to peel, a ham to glaze and a bottle of Irish cream that is screaming to be opened as soon as the ice cubes set.  Forgot to buy ice, doh, not to mention a white tablecloth that desperately needs a wash and will now have to go in with the coloureds :(