Tuesday, 28 November 2017

McCANN SUPPORTER GUILTY OF DOWNLOADING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY

UPDATE - CORRECTION

I am told by many sources, including those that do know, that Nigel Nessling is not Muratfan.  Apologies.  I wrote this blog in the wee small hours, and a skim read of Nessling's website and the cesspit.  As I mentioned, the characters of the more vitriolic trolls are of little interest to me.  While their true characters usually do reveal something sinister and murky, they lack depth, all roads lead to pathetic, socially inept creeps crying out for attention.  They are a sideshow to the main event.

Anyway, I am happy to be corrected, and hope it doesn't detract from the blog's main theme.  Muratfan, Greenink (?), Vee8, Tigerloaf, BB1, Jayelles, Wicatty, Michael Walker etc, they all have the same agenda, the same message, and usually, the same words.  It's as though they are all reading from the same script.  There is no individuality, there is no 'face' of Team McCann, because none of them are willing to reveal the true identities behind the monsters they have created. 

Nigel Nessling, Vee8, I suspect, is the beginning of the endgame.  He may be on the periphery, an outer domino, but that's how endgames usually begin.

_______________________________________



Many thanks to posters at 10:33 and 15:36 on my last blog.  Well, well, well!

I have never taken too much notice of the pro McCann trolls on social media, remiss of me, perhaps, but their identities have never particularly interested me. Whenever, or however, they are exposed, the result will be sad. On many levels. 

This, however, for me is a revelation, it kind of confirms something I have always suspected. You see I DO think child pornography is involved, which at this point may confuse some of my regular readers, but bear with me.  I don't believe it is involved in the same way as Bennett, and those freaks in the cesspit putting family snaps under a microscope.

Let me explain, via the bigger picture.  In the olden days - last century, homosexuality was a criminal offence.  For men at least, Queen Victoria didn't think women did that sort of thing.  I don't know the exact laws that applied, but I do know that being exposed as a homosexual could lead to imprisonment and being cast out of society.  In a nutshell it could lead to ruination.  Obviously this put a lot of rich and powerful men in constant fear of blackmail and of course corruption.  Politicians for example, could be forced to forced to pass bills, Judges could be forced to let criminals off.

Fortunately, those days are long gone, but the internet opens up all sorts of avenues for the same kind of bribery and corruption.  That is people who are 'caught' with material of a dubious nature on their computers are open not only to prosecution but to the same kind of social disgrace as those who were exposed as homosexuals in the 1950's.  That is if they are found to have, or suspected of having, dubious material on their computers, they can bribed, corrupted and forced into doing things they don't want to do, for fear of being exposed. 

I can't define material of a dubious nature, because it's not something I have any knowledge of, I don't know how porn is categorised and I don't think I want to.  And in that I a not alone, it is a subject, most of us don't want to think about.  But we should be concerned.  In this climate of fear, taking pictures of your child in a Nativity Play is almost a criminal act.  And of course most underage images exchanged online are teens sending selfies to other teens.  I read of one 18 year old being prosecuted for sending an underage picture of herself to herself.  Whilst the whole subject is so blurry, almost anyone could be subject to a dawn raid and having their computers seized.

But what has brought this subject to the fore, is the unmasking of Nigel Nessling. no blurring of the lines or room for doubt in his case.  That he is now officially a creep comes as no surprise, he is a nasty, prolific troll who patrolled social media under the screenname of Vee8.  A name that sends a shudder through every McCann sceptic who has ever encountered him.  He was the scourge of the 'antis', the hammer of the disbelievers, the thug, who's job it was to patrol social media and scare away anyone who questioned the McCann's abduction story. 

It is impossible to separate him the notorious Myths' sites, and of course the notorious group who compiled the dossier that led to Brenda Leyland's death. For those not familiar with the 'Dossier' it was for many years the foundation of a pro McCann website called Exposing the Myths.  A public website, that named, shamed, and put up photographs of anyone on Facebook or in the forums who did not believe the McCanns.  Facebook pages were raided for pictures of family, and employers were contacted.  It was, effectively a Blacklist, designed to destroy the lives and careers of everyone they named. They had over a 100 pages on me!  It was all deleted following Brenda's death. 

The behaviour of the pro McCann supporters is something that has gone completely unnoticed by the mainstream media, and more recently, by that group of academics who studied the McCann twitter hashtag.  It has also been ignored by the parents of Madeleine themselves, who have never made any attempt to distance themselves from the sheer thuggery of those who profess to support them.  For that reason, the McCanns now find themselves in the very awkward position of their greatest supporter being convicted of making and owning images of the 'highest category'.  It is the 'making' part that disturbs me, how on earth did he not get a prison sentence? From the scant information available, there are no blurred lines about holiday snaps, he is clearly guilty, and given the 'quantity', it wasn't a new hobby.

Of course, the McCanns can't be blamed for the lunatics who support them, but they have always had the power to say, that is not what we represent, pack it in.  They haven't of course, because they knew they faced a social media war from Day, and they are finishers.  There was no word of remorse, regret or sympathy following the death of Brenda Leyland either. 

Yet another stick to beat Gerry and Kate with, I hear my critics cry, yes it is, and one I hesitated to use but then I think, what if Nessling had been an 'anti', or, which would have been manna from heaven for them, a supporter of Goncalo Amaral?  They would have been on the phone to every media outlet and tabloid editor in their overflowing contacts lists.  Stop the Press.

The 'antis' do of course, have more than their own fair share of creeps and lunatics, but that's almost a given.  Unfortunately, all those of us who didn't believe the McCanns for sane reasons, came to be represented in the media by the ugly mug and fire and brimstone preaching of Tony Bennett. I always wondered how it so quickly became taboo to doubt the McCanns, but the answer was there all the time.  We had all been tarred with the same ugly, hate filled brush. 

Nigel Nessling, was quite clearly, a nasty, malicious sociopath, (how did the academics miss that?).  His behaviour was borderline criminal, so why was such a deeply unpleasant character part of the McCann media monitoring team?  And he must have been, because they have never condemned his behaviour.  How did he become involved in the Madeleine case? And in light of these recent revelations, do they not find it a tad creepy that a man like that should be so interested in their missing 3 year old daughter?

I question why Nigel Nessling didn't get a prison sentence, but the questioning doesn't stop there.  How long was he abusing children, and if he was making the images, then the abuse is not in doubt. How did he fly under the radar of CEOP, who given their speciality, must at some point have investigated those with an obsessional interest in the Madeleine case. Ok, fair dues, too many of us, but Muratfan stood out and he was promoting their own Minute for Madeleine* campaign (the one with the Indian Maddie) and selling their message, he would never have got past FBI profilers.  Regardless, this is hugely embarrassing for the McCanns, will they distance themselves from him now? 




https://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/a-minute-for-madeleine/





150 comments:

  1. "How long was he abusing children, and if he was making the images, then the abuse is not in doubt. How did he fly under the radar of CEOP, who given their speciality, must at some point have investigated those with an obsessional interest in the Madeleine case."

    Good question Rosalinda.

    "Nigel Nessling told police he initially saw an image of an eight-year-old girl and thought she was “pretty and cute” and became obsessed with viewing indecent images of children over a period of seven or eight years, Ipswich Crown Court heard."

    http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipswich-man-avoids-prison-after-downloading-over-40-000-indecent-images-of-children-1-5283183

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How did those CEOP professionals who compiled the profile of Robert Murat miss Nessling? Bizarre.

      Delete
  2. Another interesting blog Ros, something that I'd never considered before that blackmail may have been involved just like in the 1950's, so many questions. I believe whatever empire of support K+G may have had it does appear to be unravelling for them as a lot has happened during 2017.
    S

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your reply 'S'.

      Unfortunately, as history and fascist dictatorships have shown, when governments use police agencies to spy on the people, it never ends well. It's probably the quickest way to round up subversives, that is, people who oppose them.

      Viewing child pornography is one of those fuzzy crimes, that allow dawn raids, instant arrests, and detention without trial. A bit like suspected terrorists. The public won't protest, because it is such a sickeningly abhorrent crime, such suspects, deserve no mercy.

      In 1999, British police mounted the largest ever clampdown on child pornography known as Operation Ore. The 'wiki' page has now been stripped of all the basic details, names like Tony Blair and Jim Gamble for example, no longer appear.

      Operation Ore, led to nearly 4000 men being charged with viewing child pornography. They were targeted by the police in response to credit card evidence received from the US. The majority of the men whose lives and families were wrecked, had been victims of credit card fraud. I believe 39 of them committed suicide, though Wiki now states it was 33. I suspect however, if you include, the long, slow, painful deaths, the number would be substantially higher.

      The man in charge of Operation Ore, Jim Gamble has been campaigning ever since for greater police powers and greater control of social media. For the greater good of course, think of the children.

      Happily the new Masters of the Universe, the owners of the social networks, told him to sling his hook, as did Theresa May. Nevertheless, he is still has a small following who believe Law and Order should be enforced on the internet by an army of specially trained vigilantes.

      Some may admire Jim Gamble's commitment to protecting children, but I am not among them. It is 100% more effective, in the real world and online, if you teach children to protect themselves.

      JG, represents that part of Labour, Old and New, who delight in the idea of a 'Nanny State', where we all reliant on them. This is where I fall out with fellow lefties, because they promote this 'victim' ideology.

      At the moment, I fear the radical feminists have got hold of the microphone and they are telling the sisters, 'don't elbow the groper in the ribs, wear it as a badge of your suffering'. I fear this current hysterical climate will suck all the joy out office affairs and workplace banter. And it's going to be tough on singletons, never again will a first date begin with the words 'oy, oy, ever seen a builder's tool?'. There will be no romance. This gender neutral, politically correct world of the future, scares the bejesus out me :)

      But back on topic. He who controls the information (internet)controls the world. Tony Blair's government were floating the ideas of a DNA Database, and Identity cards and access to the public's activity. All part of combating terrorism, supposedly, under the cry, only those with something to hide will object. All classic Goebbels.

      The Madeleine case opened up all sorts of new ways to get the public on board with the idea of the government spying on them. The public had reacted in their millions to Madeleine's appealing, cherubic, face. There was massive mileage in convincing the public there children were in constant danger of being abducted. There is no better scenario than 'stolen from her bed', in spite of having caring, loving parents. Ergo. It could be you.

      Oh, there are conspiracies indeed 'S', which is why this case is still so riveting!

      Delete
    2. The more I learn about this case the more it confuses me but perhaps that the point. I've only been following the case since February but it seems that all the different paths that have previously been used by K+G are being blocked from being used by them one at a time, that's how it seems to me anyway.

      I suppose until recently I was oblivious to the kind of blackmail that can occur, this case has opened my eyes up to the politics at play.
      S

      Delete
    3. ros, You really do need to understand the dirty war fought in Northern Ireland. The British had no intel on the Irish nationists (PIRA). This was gained by nefarious means. The IRA were utterly penetrated by spies within, and most were not easy turncoats. Rather blackmail had to be used by 14 int and MI 5 to manipulate Stakenife and the other touts. Jim Gamble was involved with his minions in the RUC, bugging and filming all the paedophiles on both sides of the political spectrum in the Kilcoran boys home. And yes, abuse was known and understood, as without active governance, the end game justified the means.
      Who watches the watchers? Tfal.

      Delete
    4. Thank you Tfal. I have often wondered how Jim Gamble went from counter terrorism to child protection, it's quite a leap.

      As an ex careleaver however, I am all about empowering the children and parents themselves. From my own experience of the care system, we were far more at risk from those who seized us from our families and those put in charge of protecting us.

      I escaped the sexual abuse while in care, possibly because my strong, feisty Irish mother on meeting the creepy ex Jesuit monk who had charge of us, told him in no uncertain terms, she knew exactly what he was. I was hugely embarrassed at the time, it was in a crowded room and she was quickly ushered away, but her warning served us well. We weren't the vulnerable children he was used to.

      Yes indeedy Tfal, who watches the watchers?

      Delete
  3. I have never heard that muratfan and Nigel Nessling are the same person. Where did you hear that, Cristobell?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They are not. Ros gets it wrong AGAIN.

      Delete
    2. https://www.blogger.com/profile/03741819861420576740

      Delete
    3. At least Ros didn't pursue the wrong family for two years. Bennett would love a return to the days when homosexuality was banned. He thinks that should form part of his hard Brexit.

      Delete
  4. Nessling should have been sent down for owning a library of paedophilia images. Again another injustice. The decision needs appealingand the judge investigating.
    Once again, we see patterns emerging: friend of Clement Freud a known paedophile and now Nessling an aggressive supporteris found out as another nonce.
    Circumstantial coincidences...all linked to a darkness us mere empaths just can’t comprehend.
    One day we will find out the truth of the lie.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Rather hypocritical of you Ros, I thought that you would be happy that this man did not receive a custodial sentence - bearing in mind your unqualified support for Chris Langham just a couple of months ago ....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not all 14:10 (Verdi?). The key word for me was 'making', Nessling was MAKING indecent images.

      You see, I DO differentiate between viewing indecent images and making them. I am sure if the authorities could get a glimpse into the minds of those who are about to climax, the prisons would be spilling over.

      Most people do not bring their tastes in pornography into the real world. If they did secretaries would be sprawled across conference tables shouting 'take me' and bosses would be wearing dog collars and going around on all fours.

      Porn just doesn't work that way 14:10. No-one, if they are sane, discusses their fetishes around the water cooler. There is public, there is private, get it?

      You should also consider, there is no logical way to define what is or isn't offensive. Every image is interpreted by the eye of the beholder. Look at history, The Bonfire of Vanities, when those opposed to change and enlightenment literally burnt and destroyed great works of art and literature.

      Your way, is to burn the audience.

      Delete
    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton28 November 2017 at 14:56
      "Your way, is to burn the audience."

      -----------------------------------------

      You are so wrong on so many counts.

      Someone viewing child abuse images that someone else MAKES is just as bad. If there wasn't an audience there would not be a demand.

      These are not just "indecent images" they are images of children being sexually abused - often videos. If you are going to comment and then preach you should do full and proper research first.

      Delete
    3. The key word was MAKING Unknown. I happen to differentiate between viewing and making.

      Applying your principle to drug crime, why don't the police target the users rather than the dealers. Your interpretation of supply and demand, is to eliminate the demand.

      Here's another analogy for you Unknown. I don't know if snuff movies are an urban legend or not, I suspect they are. But if real, imagine the police targeting, not those who committed murder on film, but those who viewed it, intentionally or unintentionally?

      I am sure there are horrific images and videos of children being abused, but I simply don't have the stomach to go there. And I suspect if I had, my door would be swiftly broken down.

      What I would like to know Unknown, is why are we not hearing of makers and producers of these images and videos being arrested? Why aren't they being named, shamed and imprisoned for a very long time? If someone were selling a lethal drug on the streets, the police priority would be to find the source. Why is that not the case with online child pornography?

      Delete
    4. The dark/deep web has been explained to you before on your blog - you denied its existence. The Police do try to find and prosecute the sources - you should realise that these type of images/videos are almost impossible to trace - they are only accessible if you go to places that you and I would never dream of going to.

      Delete
    5. ''What I would like to know Unknown, is why are we not hearing of makers and producers of these images and videos being arrested? Why aren't they being named, shamed and imprisoned for a very long time?''

      They have to be arrested first. Your naivety is sometimes astonishing.

      Delete
    6. I'll repeat the question as it seems to have gone over your head. WHY aren't they being arrested?

      Delete
  7. Ros says: "Anyway, I am happy to be corrected, and hope it doesn't detract from the blog's main theme. Muratfan, Greenink (?), Vee8, Tigerloaf, BB1, Jayelles, Wicatty, Michael Walker etc, they all have the same agenda, the same message, and usually, the same words."

    I really don't think you should be linking all of those names in a blog that has the theme of downloading child pornography unless you have provable evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Err, is it possible to libel a nameless, faceless, screen name? Do alter egos have the same rights as the holder of the original name (which we do not know)?

    Yeh, good luck with that! lol

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. greenink is a journalist I believe. Did I mention libel - I only said I don't think you should be doing it?

      Delete
    2. Hi Ros,the judge David Goodwin,speaking to Nigel Nessling,public."You plainly have it in you to be a decent,responsible member of Society"? So based on his words,Mr Nessling is still a danger to minors,but gives a suspended sentence over a Twelve month period?
      Perhaps someone from society could ask Judge Goodwin,"would he care to have Mr Nessling",care for any of his children,as part of his 150 hrs community care hrs package to Society?
      Would that be an"Emphatic No"your honour?

      Delete
    3. @ Anonymous28 November 2017 at 16:15

      Nessling should have been jailed.

      Delete
    4. He should be 'nessling' in a small cell with a big homosexual lifer who will teach him a thing or two about un-consensual sex just like what those poor little kiddies endured in all those horror videos he seemed to enjoy watching!!!

      Delete
  9. Your headline says it all. Not 'man' or 'monster' or even a name. Only what matters in your dark world ; he was a McCann supporter.Let's make the link folks. Dirty lunatic with penchant for children and someone who doesn't believe the McCann abduction story.So, let's put two and two together and begin some stretching-to-fit.

    None of any of this news story or the man it's about has anything to do with A, the McCanns, B, the credibility of their abduction story or C, Madeleine's fate. Why are you trying to associate it all and make connections ?

    ''he is a nasty, prolific troll who patrolled social media under the screenname of Muratfan''

    ''the thug, who's job it was to patrol social media and scare away anyone who questioned the McCann's abduction story. ''

    ''''It is impossible to separate him the notorious Myths' sites, and of course the notorious group who compiled the dossier that led to Brenda Leyland's death''

    How does all that support your opening gambit :

    ''I have never taken too much notice of the pro McCann trolls on social media, remiss of me, perhaps, but their identities have never particularly interested me. ''

    ''This, however, for me is a revelation, it kind of confirms something I have always suspected. You see I DO think child pornography is involved, which at this point may confuse some of my regular readers, but bear with me''

    So, a McCann supporter gets his collar felt for paedophilia and before he's left court you have yet another 'new' theory.And it involves that. The rest of your preaching leads nowhere new at all.What were we 'bearing with' you for ? Or haven't you put that together yet.

    A new low all in all. Your eagerness to impersonate the havern blog has bitten you somewhere painful.In your feverish excitement you didn't think to check facts or evidence.You didn't consider you might be talking about the wrong man, therefore slandering him.Yes, it's 'words on a screen' and 'freedom of speech' etc.It's still a disgrace. Have you cancelled that latest theory now ? We were looking forward to the latest flight of fancy that you're 'sure of'. I didn't think you could top your defence of Chris Langham, the convicted paedophile, on your Aug 29 blog.I won't underestimate how low you and other 'anti' sites can stoop .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had no interest in the trolls, I wasn't deaf, dumb and blind to them.

      I don't have another new theory at all, where did you get that from? Don't you have to have an original theory in order for there to be a new one?

      Those familiar with my blog, especially those familiar with subtext, will know exactly what I mean, and what I have been saying for years. Let's just say, Nessling gave me the opening I needed.

      Your hypocrisy btw, never fails to astound me. Your own efforts to find 'antis' to destroy not only reached a new low, it resulted in a woman's death. Had Nessling been a supporter of Goncalo Amaral, you would have been feasting forever more.

      There are no depths lower than driving an innocent woman to suicide, Brenda Leyland didn't have any dark sordid secrets, but you destroyed her anyway. I think what we are seeing here, is karma in action.

      Delete
    2. "Let's just say, Nessling gave me the opening I needed."

      You have never in the past needed an opening to post bile about the Mccanns or anyone who supports them.

      (I am not anon at 16:23)

      Delete
    3. @ Anonymous28 November 2017 at 16:23

      I agree with you.

      Delete
    4. Ros - as a matter of interest have you seen what has happened to shoddy freedom of speech Katie Hopkins?

      Delete
    5. ''I don't have another new theory at all, where did you get that from? Don't you have to have an original theory in order for there to be a new one?''

      from this :

      ''This, however, for me is a revelation, it kind of confirms something I have always suspected. You see I DO think child pornography is involved, which at this point may confuse some of my regular readers, but bear with me''

      As for deaf, dumb and blind to trolls. You rambled on about the 'thug' enough to show you'd been scrutinising him and other forums and platforms that refused to believe the baseless accusations against the parents.

      Delete
    6. ''There are no depths lower than driving an innocent woman to suicide, Brenda Leyland didn't have any dark sordid secrets, but you destroyed her anyway.''

      'you' ? Who are you accusing now ? Do you think you can throw wild allegations all over your blog about anything and anyone ? You enjoy bringing Brenda Leyland's tragedy up don't you ? Suicide is a decision made independently. It's the worst possible mental state anyone can find themselves in. You remind everyone who reads here of her tragic fate every time you talk about the McCanns and either imply or directly accuse them of ordering some kind of 'hit'. You don't mention Twitter's refusal to intervene in trolling that was serious enough to draw the attention of Sky and Brunt who got the pleasure of ambushing the poor lady. Just the McCanns or them and Mitchell.It suits your strange obsession.

      Delete
    7. Yes, I've seen what happened to Katie Hopkins. You are not trying to compare me to her surely?

      Your stupidity reminds me of the time I once dated an Orangeman, not literally orange, but a man of a certain religious and ideological persuasion from Northern Ireland. He was actually as unpleasant as his ideology, but good looking, no excuse I know, but I was ruled by my hormones at the time.

      He told me a story about how he was arrested and held in a cell for 6 days when he first came to England on suspicion of being a member of the IRA. The terminally dim police who arrested him, could not understand the politics of Northern Ireland enough to realise that an Ulster protestant could be on the same side as the British.

      That you think I hold or espouse the same kind of views as Katie Hopkins, takes your own stupidity to another level. KH is on the far right, I am on the far left. We could not be more opposite.

      She preaches hate. I preach love. She preaches division, I preach unity. She preaches war, I preach peace. See how it works?

      Delete
    8. Ros 18:55
      "She preaches hate. I preach love. She preaches division, I preach unity. She preaches war, I preach peace. See how it works?"

      We can all read you blog!

      Delete
  10. "Apologies. I wrote this blog in the wee small hours, and a skim read of Nessling's website and the cesspit."

    That is not an excuse, nor a reason, nor an explanation, nor justification.

    You were wrong and for someone who regularly tells your readers what an expert on everything Mccann related you are - you should be ashamed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will stand in corner and feel ashamed for 10 minutes - will that do? Not really into self flagellation.

      Delete
  11. I believe Nessling should have been sent to jail.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Disaster blog post Ros.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Disaster, really? On the 'hits' front, it is proving very popular.

      Delete
    2. So you finally admit that you are just looking for hits.

      A number of things have been revealed recently about the credibility of your blog.

      Delete
  13. Anonymous28 November 2017 at 18:35

    ''Disaster blog post Ros.''

    Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton28 November 2017 at 18:38

    ''Disaster, really? On the 'hits' front, it is proving very popular.''

    At least we now know what you prioritise. Forget how slanderous or unfounded your allegations and musings are, or how they are in very poor taste. It's shock value. Hits matter. Spoken like a true social media addict. No integrity or self respect whatsoever.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The writer in me would carry on if I had only one reader 18:50, but the blogger in me is delighted to have such a large audience. Blogging is very competitive, the best bloggers have a larger audience than many mainstream journalists, they are the news sources of the future.

      Of course, I want a popular blog, and I work at it. I do the homework, I do the studying, this hasn't just landed in my lap!

      What really bothers you 18:50, is that I have hit on a successful formula. Readers keep returning to see what I have to say, and I'm betting that never happens to you.

      Tis true, I am using more 'shock jock' tactics these days, probably because I'm very influenced by the US media these days. The blogs I read are the ones that catch my eye.

      Yes hits matter. Just as bums on seats matter. Good and bad taste left the building years ago. Especially where Gerry and Kate McCann are concerned. This couple have spent over 10 years ruining the lives of others whilst demanding immunity from criticism themselves.

      They may have the newspaper barons and the MSM under the thumb of Carter Ruck, but I'm a free agent, the contents of my blog are unbound, free from any outside influence. It's the only forum online where the truth about Madeleine's disappearance can be discussed freely.

      Read it and weep 18:50, because when this case blows wide open, which it will soon, this blog will become even more popular.

      Delete
    2. ''Of course, I want a popular blog, and I work at it. I do the homework, I do the studying, this hasn't just landed in my lap! ''

      Your studying and homework worked well for this thread. Did you do it whilst waiting for the kettle to boil ?

      Delete
    3. "Of course, I want a popular blog, and I work at it. I do the homework, I do the studying, this hasn't just landed in my lap! "

      Apart from when it is is the early hours: " I wrote this blog in the wee small hours, and a skim read of Nessling's website and the cesspit."

      Delete
    4. ''Blogging is very competitive, the best bloggers have a larger audience than many mainstream journalists, they are the news sources of the future. ''

      The mission statement of all tabloids for the last 40 years. Blogging may well be competitive but so are The Sun, The Daily Mirror and The Daily Mail. That doesn't detract from the vacuous drivel they sell. They don't let facts spoil a good story either.

      ''Readers keep returning to see what I have to say, and I'm betting that never happens to you''

      There's a subtle difference between interest and curiosity.Car crash TV has a lot of viewers too, but not due to a mass interest.

      ''Tis true, I am using more 'shock jock' tactics these days, probably because I'm very influenced by the US media these days. The blogs I read are the ones that catch my eye. ''

      That explains it but doesn't excuse it.

      ''Yes hits matter. Just as bums on seats matter. Good and bad taste left the building years ago. Especially where Gerry and Kate McCann are concerned. This couple have spent over 10 years ruining the lives of others whilst demanding immunity from criticism themselves. ''

      An interesting observation from someone who recently( preceding 'Mitchell' blog) informed readers that she never preaches hate. Who has had their lives ruined by the McCanns and how ? Can you give an example of them 'demanding' immunity from criticism ? Do you think they might think they should be immune from it beyond their bad judgement in leaving their children vulnerable ? They lost a child, the ultimate punishment.But you believe they deserve more. Is that'shock' or just spite?

      ''They may have the newspaper barons and the MSM under the thumb of Carter Ruck, but I'm a free agent, the contents of my blog are unbound, free from any outside influence. It's the only forum online where the truth about Madeleine's disappearance can be discussed freely. ''

      They have the MSM and the Barons under somebody else's thumb ? That's a clever trick. Even if we suspend our disbelief to accommodate your creative streak, how does any of that prevent either police force acting ? Do they control politicians, newspaper barons , the intel of the UK as well as UK police and the police of another country ? All because they have good jobs and a nice detached home in Rothely ? 10 years and 12 million to pull out all the stops to make sure they don't face the full force of the law ? You believe all of that makes good sense, but an abduction was faked because no fingerprints or evidence of an abductor was found . Thousands have seen 'evidence' within statements ( typed out by the police) but SY, OG and the PJ haven't seen them ?

      The case can't be 'discussed freely' on this blog. One hypothesis can . Others are dismissed out of because no evidence supports them. No evidence supports anything. Ten years is a pretty substantial clue to that fact . Kicking and screaming isn't going to change that. Your current defiant stance isn't really convincing.

      VT

      Delete
    5. Car crash TV doesn't really apply VT. You see I built my blog and audience from scratch. In the early days, I was lucky to get 50 hits a day, it's picked up as the years have gone by, because many of my readers have stayed with me and new ones have joined them. I have a compulsive writing style VT, vexing for others, like yourself, but wonderful for me, because I know my hard work is appreciated.

      The criticism of Gerry and Kate is not about them 'leaving the children' as you well know, nor is it because they have good jobs and a nice detached home in Rothley. (Seriously?) It is about the lies, their failure to co-operate with the police and their hounding of the former detective.

      Again with all this nonsense that the police have got nothing. 6+ years and they've got nothing VT? Again, seriously. You may be able to kid yourself, but your not kidding anyone else.

      This case can be discussed freely on this blog! If neither you or any of your cohorts is are capable for putting forward a convincing argument on behalf of the parents, don't blame me. You have as much opportunity as anyone else.

      There's no kicking and screaming from me VT, why would there be? And I wasn't aware I had a current defiant stance, lol, am I a prisoner with a number, or a subject under study?

      Delete
    6. Err, I'm not trying to excuse shock jock tactics - I like them, I'm going to use them more!

      You see like everyone else on the world wide web I want to attract visitors to my blog. Yes, it is exciting when I get hundreds and thousands more hits, I'm not an automaton! And I'm not without ambition.

      And you know what VT, I'm pretty darn proud of what I have created, and I'm proud that people like what I write. That's why people return again and again.

      You know darn well this blog is not filled with hatred, nor is it a campaign to hurt an innocent family because they have good jobs and a nice detached house (room for a pony?).

      Yes, I'm going to look for new ways to promote my blog - why shouldn't I? Why should I not market my writing in the same way as every other writer, blogger, website or forum owner? Didn't the McCanns pay Lord Bell £500k to keep them on the front pages for a year?


      You are trying to project onto me, some sort of dark sinister character who simply doesn't exist

      Delete
    7. ''The criticism of Gerry and Kate is not about them 'leaving the children' as you well know, nor is it because they have good jobs and a nice detached home in Rothley. (Seriously?) It is about the lies, their failure to co-operate with the police and their hounding of the former detective. ''

      I hadn't forgotten the bottom of the barrel. I know what your criticism is based on. It's not as though you're subtle. It's based on what you have decided they have done but the police haven't.It's based on the knowledge you perceive that you have of how their minds work and how those of the Tapas group work. It's based on your perceived knowledge of how to read faces and body language. It just isn't based on a microbe of evidence that would be admissible in a trial. Suspicion in other words.When pressed about the over - involvement of our own SY and MI5 and how they colluded to throw a shield around the McCanns, you point to their 'privileged' lifestyle and status ( as opposed to 'council estate class') as though that's the reason. The former detective went public stating that they( parents) were liars and had in fact buried their child. It was( and still is) an abduction scenario the police are looking at. The detective had no evidence to back his allegations up, so the parents, who had lost their child, retaliated.You call it 'hounding'.An objective view of this situation would see the hounding but not from anyone other than the detective. It wasn't the McCanns who removed him from the case.

      ''Again with all this nonsense that the police have got nothing. 6+ years and they've got nothing VT? Again, seriously. You may be able to kid yourself, but your not kidding anyone else.''

      I'm not leading either side of the investigation so it isn't me trying to kid anyone. I say they have nothing because were getting closer to eleven years now and Madeleine's 15th year.If they have anything why is that the case ? If that's 'nonsense' explain to me just how it is.

      ''This case can be discussed freely on this blog! If neither you or any of your cohorts is are capable for putting forward a convincing argument on behalf of the parents, don't blame me''

      I don't have cohorts nor need any. I can, and do, think for myself.I don't need to log on to Twitter to check what I'm thinking today. Hive thinking annoys me. I've put arguments forward you haven't taken to pieces. Calling them nonsense or wrong isn't anything. Your 'style' is to attempt to belittle me or anyone who disagrees with you, rather than the points made.You fail either way. My arguments are based on 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'.Yours are based on suspicion, imagination and popular opinion.I have no evidence, you have no evidence.When evidence magically appears to incriminate someone, we'll have the answers. We won't until then. Trying to dismiss anyone or anything that contradicts your mindset without demonstrating why is futile.

      '' And I wasn't aware I had a current defiant stance, lol, am I a prisoner with a number, or a subject under study?''

      You're not a prisoner under study, you're just a slave to your own bad habits.The defiant stance I was referring to is your defending of the major mistake you made in starting this thread then staggering through the fall out trying to rationalise it.

      VT

      Delete
    8. Don't kid yourself it's only VT who sees all that.

      Delete
    9. Err, I didn't point to their 'privileged' lifestyle and status, lol, you did! I take it my 'room for a pony' joke went right over your head. Hint. Hycynth Bucket.

      Delete
    10. ''Yes, I'm going to look for new ways to promote my blog - why shouldn't I? Why should I not market my writing in the same way as every other writer, blogger, website or forum owner? Didn't the McCanns pay Lord Bell £500k to keep them on the front pages for a year?''

      There's nothing wrong with promoting your blog.There's nothing fundamentally wrong with using shock headlines to draw the eye.But using shock tactics that are misleading, or just not true, isn't really admirable is it.That's what i mean about tacky tabloid tactics. Would The Sun suddenly have credibility if it changed to Blog format ? What's wrong with a new strategy such as entertaining readers or publishing interesting items that are verifiable ? You'd have a lot of contributors then instead of a lot of curious onlookers. As for Bell , he offered, they were advised to accept and he got richer under arguably false pretences. Wouldn't you have taken any help you thought would bring results ? They trusted the wrong kinds of people.The big red flag was the promise of the 'year long' exposure . How could he, or those who recommended his services, be confident nothing would turn up or be solved before that year was up ?

      I'm not projecting anything. I call what I see, not what I imagine.

      VT

      Delete
    11. I have been tempted more than once to make Hyacinth quip in your direction.I didn't want to be called aggressive or bullying :)

      VT

      Delete
    12. Keep up the good work Ros
      The MC nonce supporters are clearly rattled when you alight on paedophilia. Our time for justice will come.

      Delete
    13. 'As for Bell, he offered, they were advised to accept ...'

      Is that how it happened? That's not how it came across in his interview. Apologies if I've misunderstood what he said.

      Delete
    14. anon 10:32

      MC nonce ? That's a really strong allegation and given the mistake that opened this thread, it shouldn't have been published. The 'our time' remark is stupid. Jump off your pony Richard III

      Delete
  14. To whom it may concern.

    I wouldn’t worry too much about Muratfan, who calls Amaral "Amoral”, the ”lowest piece of shit ever”, and Brenda ”just a deluded old dead woman”. Apparently, he's very good at shifting for himself.

    ReplyDelete
  15. About paedophilia I'm saying nothing since people are incapable of rational discussion of the subject, even though they just love to post and post about it.

    What I don't understand are the allegations that Nessling is or was some part of team McCann and that somehow his paedophilia ties in with the various claims that the latter is somehow connected with the disappearance. There is no evidence of any such connection and the claims appear to be identical smears by association to the JATYK stuff about bent PJ officers knowing Amaral.

    Nessling is an unpleasant man who, as usual with the pro-fanatics, first abused and libelled me and then eventually went silent about things he couldn’t deny. That said there is something not just hysterical but much worse about the desire for revenge on him by prominent antis, particularly the circulation of petitions demanding a prison sentence. One of those I saw on twitter gloated about how long he'd last without injury in a prison. What a disgusting thing to post.

    There isn't much difference between that and the dossier, is there? Well, is there? The McCanns continue to work like a hot poultice in bringing stinking yellow pus out of supposedly ordinary people, whatever side they take.

    So in case people don't get it, yes, I'm saying why don't people just leave the man alone instead of sinking to the level of the McCanns and their acolytes. That will make me even more popular.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And we are supposed to believe you are the real "blacksmith"? Not that it is important because the real blacksmith - who no longer comments about the Mccanns was crap anyway.

      Delete
    2. "The McCanns continue to work like a hot poultice in bringing stinking yellow pus out of supposedly ordinary people, whatever side they take."

      I suggest you do a disappearing act again.

      Delete
  16. Explain ''leave the man alone instead of sinking to the level of the McCanns and their acolytes'' please. Most of your post makes sense. But comparing the vile behaviour of frustrated fanatics who don't pause to examine actual facts in the haste to spit poison to the McCanns is lost on me.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Read it and weep 18:50, because when this case blows wide open, which it will soon, this blog will become even more popular."

    Remember how popular the cesspit was (according to bennett)remember how it was insignificant and a tiny part of the internet when it was part of his court case?

    Ring any bell?

    ReplyDelete
  18. "How long was he abusing children, and if he was making the images, then the abuse is not in doubt."

    Abusing children?
    As for making images, this might inform you better.
    (From http://www.dilloway.co.uk/definition-of-indecent-image-offences.html)

    [begin]
    Actions that might be prosecuted as making an indecent image of a child include ...

    Clicking on a web page that shows unambiguously that an indecent image will be displayed on screen as a result of that click.
    Clicking on an unambiguous web page to cause a picture or movie, or a file containing many pictures or movies, to be saved on the disk of the computer.
    Typing an unambiguous word or phrase into an Internet search and causing indecent images of children to be displayed in search results on the computer screen.

    Actions that will not be prosecuted as making an indecent image might include ...

    Searching for legal pornography and causing unwanted child images to be displayed on the computer screen.
    Clicking on some text or a picture that does not refer to images of children and causing unwanted child images to be displayed on the computer screen.
    Using file-sharing software to search for legal pornography and downloading a file that includes images of children.
    [end]

    Sam E

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Sam. I wasn't sure whether to publish it or delete it, but it would be wrong to inflict my own fears onto others.

      I suspect the distaste I feel is shared by many others, including those who hold political office. One of those awkward subjects they pass on to 'experts' and then accept the results without double checking. These things happen, watch 'The Thick of It'. Better still, look at historic child sex abuse purges, the Satanic ones especially, that lead to hundreds of arrests and very few actual convictions. We have all been indoctrinated since childhood that the world is full of sinister predators, probably began with Little Red Hiding Hood.

      The subject does of course need to be confronted, by academics preferably, those qualified in psychology and psychiatry, rather than seasoned police officers.
      Unfortunately, child abuse is a subject similar to recreational drugs. That is governments don't really want to know the details, because those details could well upset the paradigm. For example when Tony Blair dabbled with the idea of decriminalising marijuana he asked a group of scientists and experts to compile a report. The group, led by Professor Knutt, returned a report that proved beyond doubt, that marijuana was a zillion times less harmful than alcohol. Tony Blair sacked him. Maybe because the legalisation of marijuana posed such an almighty threat to the giant pharmaceutical industries?

      The sweet, innocent face of 3 year old Madeleine, has sadly been the face that launched a thousand new enterprises and arguably created the Crisis Management industry. Who knew victims of trauma must first save their reputations?

      As for the link, I will leave it up to others' judgement. Thank you. I think. :)

      Delete
    2. Was that a reply to my comment?

      Sam E

      Delete
    3. (Ros)


      I think you need to make a distinction or two. I nearly jumped down your throat months ago when you described paedophillia as another form of sexuality. It isn't. It's a psychiatric disorder.Unless you keep that single fact at the forefront of your mind, you'll continue to mention it in tandem with the recreational vices like drugs and drink. The recreational vices begin with curiosity and wanting to try something that looks like fun. The failure to give them up results in the addiction. Nobody, out of boredom or the desire for escapism, considers abusing a child.That's a different illness completely and no cure is available pharmaceutically or behaviourally. That's why, in certain states in America, chemical castration is administered as the only cut off( no pun intended).Certain abusers in the UK have asked for the same but the UK consider it a breach of civil / human rights. Satanic child abuse is a different set of rules with it's tentacles reaching elsewhere. It's roots lie a couple of thousand years in the past and are justified by some dubious, subjective religious rationale.It's a loophole basically. Disgusting I know but there you have it. I'll say no more about that stuff.It's not nice.

      VT

      Delete
  19. Ros lol at
    "Err, is it possible to libel a nameless, faceless, screen name? Do alter egos have the same rights as the holder of the original name (which we do not know)?

    Yeh, good luck with that! lol"

    But apparently "Muratfan" is a real genuine person who she had to issue an apology for.

    Note very carefully - Ros did not issue an apology to Maratfa - she issued an apology to the blog.

    What a big mistake. Especially after how many hots she has gained!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Cristobell Author‏ @RosalindaHu
    8h

    McCANN SUPPORTER GUILTY OF DOWNLOADING CHILD PORNOGRAPHY http://cristobell.blogspot.com/2017/11/mccann-supporter-guilty-of-downloading.html?spref=tw … UPDATE/CORRECTION #McCann 28/11/17


    yes make sure you point people to your erroneous blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yuck, yuck, yuck, Unknown, I have not published your graphically explicit descriptions, nor will I. You are seriously misunderstanding the objectives of this blog.

      Delete
    2. @ Ros 21:09

      They are what people are judged on - facts. They are not guesses that some blogger makes. If you don't like the facts then don't comment on something you have no idea on. Simple.

      Delete
    3. You should mention that my yuck yuck yuck comments were exactly what was quoted from the newspaper report.

      Delete
    4. Whatever Unknown, I didn't read it, it's in my spam box.

      Delete
    5. A sort of head-in-the-sand spam box?

      Delete
  21. Ros posts about a case where the press repost states what a Category A offence is https://theukdatabase.com/2017/11/16/nigel-nessling-ipswich/ but pretends she does not want to know the truth. It was not too graphically explicit to post int a newspaper but Ros wants to bury her head in the sand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown, I have already confessed I have no stomach for it, so why are you trying to force it upon me?

      Delete
  22. Did Nessling contribute to the 'dossier' that lead to Brenda Leyland's death ?

    Was he one of the "concerned members of the public" that Martyn Brunt referred to ?

    Did Jim Gamble have contact with Nessling at any point whilst he was actively participating in Brenda being "made an example of" ?

    ReplyDelete
  23. I know the "won't someone think of the children" line gets mocked, possibly even overplayed, but in Blacksmith's case, he really doesn't! ALL his concern appears to be for Nessling.

    ReplyDelete
  24. @JimGamble_INEQE out of interest, did you ever get close to cracking the known paedo ring in Parliament?

    Jim Gamble: I don't know how close they got as I wasn't involved in the investigation. The fact is paedophiles infiltrate all walks of life.

    @JimGamble_INEQE as with other cases, the evidence was right there staring at people in the face. Nothing was done. Sounds familiar

    Jim Gamble: these people hide in plain sight & use power, influence, lies & deceit in their jobs, families & in public to hide who they really r

    https://twitter.com/JimGamble_INEQE/status/721616799104659456

    ReplyDelete
  25. Interesting - when trying to view the cesspit I got the following warning:

    "Your connection is not secure
    The owner of jillhavern.forumotion.net has configured their web site improperly. To protect your information from being stolen, Firefox has not connected to this web site."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I also get this message on IPad. I can’t view it either.

      Delete
    2. Hacked by cyber criminals.

      Delete
    3. Interesting here, too.
      I get same with Google Chrome
      -
      SixYearsInAComaMan

      Delete
  26. As the group here having a coffee have just stated after I read your latest guff Ros, you may not be a paedophile but you are every bit as bad as the others.

    There was one person just stated, ok there was no internet in the war days but there is more fuss being made about 2 people who went on holiday with 3 children and who sadly lost 1 child in mysterious circumstances than there has been over the genocide of WWI & WW2 and that is true!

    How disgusting are you to be forever blogging about Madeleine's disappearance and laying it at the feet of her parents?

    As said, you are no better and the sooner you realise it the better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/gerry-mccann-slammed-for-hypocrisy-after-speaking-out-about-press-intrusion-a3219046.html

      "Irony & hypocrisy all in one go. Gerry McCann doing the rounds on TV & media, whining & moaning. Not one appeal to Maddie"

      Delete
    2. I'm very flattered to be the topic of your coffee break 11:26, the Oscar Wilde in me just luuves being talked about :)

      You are right of course, there are bigger and far more pressing issues I should tackle, perhaps not wars of the last century, but the horrors that are going on in this country and indeed the world.

      The problem is, and I'll be quite honest here, I am a manic depressive. Where a psychopath cannot empathise, I cannot stop empathising. If I think too deeply about the wickedness around me, I am reduced to a blubbering wreck. News items can leave me inconsolable. Unable to function.

      For my own mental health, I stay within boundaries that keep me sane. When I am teetering on the edge of the 'black dog', I wander off into the world of The Tudors, studying characters from history is one of my definitions of bliss. When I tip over the edge, it's back to Jerry Seinfeld and Some Like it Hot.

      For me the Madeleine case became a form of escapism, a puzzle that kept my mind away from the bereavements I was going through. It is human nature to solve puzzles, so I make no apologies.

      I despise injustice and abuse of power 11:26, I want to fight to all of it, and because I can't, I am eaten up by depression. I have those same feelings of powerlessness that I felt as a child in the convent.

      I agree, in the whole scheme of things, the disappearance of a small child and the possible involvement of her parents, is but a speck in the ocean. But this is an injustice I can and will fight, because, if you are a regular reader of my blog, you will understand that this so much more than a missing child case.

      Delete
    3. Thank you for confirming I am not a paedophile but just as bad as those who are. Ok.

      With respect Coffee Break, I spent my formative years in the care of sadists and paedophiles. Think Zimbado experiment, but with nuns and kids. I have also spent my entire adult life trying to discover the root of that evil. I've never been able to say I'm definitely there, but I'm getting closer.

      The great threat to children comes from their homes, families and people who know them. Not from weirdos looking at pictures online. In order to harm children, they have to access to children, that's why religious orders, scouting groups etc have way above the national average.

      I find this terror of creeps getting hold of childrens' pictures quite bizarre. Not the violent, abusive ones, obviously, but regular pics of regular kids. What are they going to do with them? That part comes purely from our own imaginations. And that must apply to EVERY picture we put up, be it your attractive self, or your attractive mutt. Ok, putting it euphemistically, let's say they 'get off' on them. Yucky yes, but it's just as likely they would 'get off' on a picture of a cheesecake. Ergo, removing all their means of 'getting off' is not a practical solution.

      Pornography, images, pictures, sculptures, saucily arranged fruit, is not the cause of violent sexual crime. There is no way of knowing what kicks off a rampage or a killing spree, it could be something as simple as 'your turn to take the rubbish out'.

      The arguments against child pornography are not too dissimilar to the arguments of the censors. That is they are trying to force a connection between what we see on our screens and real crime that simply isn’t there. Most people, happily, don’t bring their deepest, darkest desires into the workplace, and they don’t go around enacting their fantasies in the real world, anymore than those who enjoy video nasties murder all their room mates.

      The idea that paedophiles can be eradicated by tracking those who view child pornography is absurd. Most children are abused in the home and by people who know them. I know I've said it before, but I will keep saying it. Those who seriously want to protect children would tackle the heart of the problem, not a tiny miniscule risk on the periphery.

      This hysteria about pictures is like something from the dark ages, the idea that certain pictures will sexually arouse a tiny portion of weirdos has a nation gripped in fear. It's laugh out loud funny. Perhaps we ought to dress babies in hijabs until people can control themselves.

      The thing is, 99.9% of us do not think of children as sexual, yet we are being indoctrinated to believe that we are surrounded by people who do. Ancient tribes would laugh at us.

      I'm not defending those who abuse and prey on children, I'm just concerned that the resources are going in the wrong direction.

      Delete
    4. ''This hysteria about pictures is like something from the dark ages, the idea that certain pictures will sexually arouse a tiny portion of weirdos has a nation gripped in fear. It's laugh out loud funny.''

      Laugh out loud funny ? You're missing the hysteria being about the exploitation of the children in the first place.Someone looking but not touching is secondary to the fact that children are being exploited for the mentally sick. The hysteria is also connected to the fact that the people who get these kinds of kicks are allowed to walk around.They're breaking the law and perpetuating a market.

      ''That is they are trying to force a connection between what we see on our screens and real crime that simply isn’t there. ''

      You've never seen any news reports about paedophiles or rapists being jailed and the additional' police found indecent images of children' at the end of it then...

      '' Most people, happily, don’t bring their deepest, darkest desires into the workplace, and they don’t go around enacting their fantasies in the real world''

      Most people aren't rapists or perverts.Most people don't make up the problem group.Would you eat an apple because it only had one worm in it ?

      ''I know I've said it before, but I will keep saying it. Those who seriously want to protect children would tackle the heart of the problem, not a tiny miniscule risk on the periphery. ''

      Who ? Parents try to without keeping them locked indoors all day and night. Laws are in place. Every prison has a wing or two just to accommodate paedophiles and protect them from other prisoners. Just how miniscule is the risk you're talking about ?

      ''The thing is, 99.9% of us do not think of children as sexual, yet we are being indoctrinated to believe that we are surrounded by people who do''

      People aren't as stupid as you're implying. Parents are vigilant because of what has happened before and what they see happening elsewhere. Ordinary people who have their ordinary children abducted, hurt or worse. It hits home and they'd be silly to think along the lines of 'it only happens to other people'. it's irresponsible to gamble with children's safety.

      ''I'm not defending those who abuse and prey on children, I'm just concerned that the resources are going in the wrong direction.''

      Care to elaborate ?

      VT

      footnote :

      You opened this thread with very strong opinions about the subject when you thought a McCann supporter had been enjoying images of children.

      ''the McCanns now find themselves in the very awkward position of their greatest supporter being convicted of making and owning images of the 'highest category'. It is the 'making' part that disturbs me, how on earth did he not get a prison sentence? ''

      Delete
  27. In response it is all about YOU when push comes to shove. Why anybody thinks your blog worthy of reading I just cannot fathom and yet I do and feel my insides curdle at your venom of the family who have had the most agonising of all crimes committed against them and then the likes of YOU needing to get the admiration of those who are as bad as you. I'd rather not have that.

    You speak of your "Black Depressions" and maybe that is what we witness when reading your blog. YOU are not alone in suffering but seemingly enjoy a d=sadistic pleasure of inflicting pain. Not a very nice characteristic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “Why anybody thinks your blog worthy of reading I just cannot fathom” says Anonymous reader 12:52.

      How interesting.

      Delete
  28. Of course it's all about me, it's my blog! See title, Cristobell Unbound - Cristobell being my pen name :)

    If it's all about me, how can also be all about directing venom at an innocent family? It can't be both. Ok, your insides curdling is not exactly the kind of reaction I am going for, but I like it anyway. It made you think.

    Tis true, I do have a constant need for reassurance, I have the over emotional temperament of an artist, the temptation to lop off an ear is always there. The kind words of my readers are inspiring.

    I share the painful details of my crazy mind, because I hope to reach out to others who feel, or have felt, the same way. And most of the time, I deal with it, with humour, life has taught me that there is no greater antidepressant than a good giggle. Depression is such a taboo subject, I'm just trying to bring it out into the open. It is always good to know you are not alone.

    I am sure it is painful for Gerry and Kate that I do not believe them, but that is something only they can deal with. All those questions remain unanswered, their pursuit of Goncalo Amaral continues.

    The pain of their propaganda and their disinformation challenged, is probably far greater. They have paid legions of spin doctors, lawyers and writers, but my little blog has beaten them, it's got to irk.

    ReplyDelete
  29. What propaganda is it exactly ? Do you seriously believe that spin doctors, various journalists, lawyers and writers would risk a criminal record and willingly treat the alleged burial of an innocent little girl as business ? For two people they didn't know.That's fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Isn't it rather odd that Nessling's conviction hasn't reached main stream media. ?

    They are usually all over anything with the slightest hint of Madeleine McCann about it. ( several national newspapers are currently carrying the non-story of the university student who jokingly said she thought she was Madeleine, for instance.)

    Of Nessling though, not a peep - no headline screaming "Maddie obsessive convicted of downloading enormous stash of child abuse images" - just tumbleweed this time.

    Remember how Brenda Leyland was confronted in the street outside her home, and then presented on rolling news as if SKY had uncovered an arch criminal ? ( and this was a woman who had committed NO crime ! )

    Yet they appear to have not the slightest bit of interest in the fact that a prolific Madeleine McCann 'activist' ( who even has a blog and has written a book about her ) has been charged and convicted of this most heinous of crimes involving children.

    Why is that then ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ''Why is that then ?''

      because it isn't the same man maybe

      Delete
    2. Anon 19:13

      "Absolutely shocked beyond belief re vee8 my thoughts are with his ex wife and children who will bear the brunt of this no doubt"

      https://twitter.com/BoyleLance/status/935103514073862146

      Delete
    3. Very strange 17:53.

      Jim Gamble, supporter of Gerry and Kate McCann and ex head of CEOP seemed to think Madeleine's disappearance had something to do with perverts exchanging child pornography online.

      Nigel Nessling, great supporter of Gerry and Kate McCann found guilty of crimes relating to online child pornography.

      Just saying.


      Delete
    4. Just saying??? Ros, you have people who could be described as 'great' supporters of yours. That doesn't mean that you have met most of them, and it certainly doesn't mean that you are or would be responsible in any way for their actions.

      Sorry, but the title of this particular blog is extremely distasteful

      Delete
  31. While you're at it, you might spare a thought for the children who were abused on that filth he downloaded

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My thoughts are still very much why haven't the abusers been arrested? Why have I never seen a headline announcing arrests of those MAKING child pornography?

      Delete
    2. "My thoughts are still very much why haven't the abusers been arrested? Why have I never seen a headline announcing arrests of those MAKING child pornography?"

      I thought that you'd been a journalist in your past life, Ros? If you are interested in finding out a little more try this from Huffington Post: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-l-pulido-phd/child-pornography-basic-f_b_4094430.html

      Delete
  32. Posted by Sergey Malinka (doisgaloes) on CMoMM forum:

    "Regarding people that support me! Thanks but I will be a judge of that! This forum on the other hand - shit flys to everybody so that Tony can feel good about himself."

    https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14745-another-look-at-sergey-malinka#377773

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Another post by Sergey Malinka (doisgaloes) on CMoMM forum:

      "Try to be in my place for last 10 years and go through all this shit without taking your own life. You wouldn't last a month! Regarding time spend online - I got a day job, so when I can I can. Why I joined this forum - to prove idiots that write shit about me here wrong!"

      https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14745-another-look-at-sergey-malinka#377786

      Delete
    2. How typical of the cesspit to chase Malinka away. They did the same to Collin Sutton and ban anyone who's off message then announce they are going to discuss them in the private members area. They recommend the Needle blog which in turn praises the "excellent" Stop The Myths. Plain to see Bennett and his worshipers are bedded down deep within Team McCann and have been misleading everyone since the deal was struck in 2013.

      Delete
    3. "@Tony Bennett

      So in summation you think removing things I no longer stand behind is bad, that having the honesty to admit that I don't know everything/not pigeonholing facts to prostrate myself for your implied dogmatic 'mass opinion' is bad, the fact you didn't like one blog is bad and any of what you wrote above is meant to be an argument?

      Hi sophistry, thanks for playing but I'll be bidding you good day."

      https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14745-another-look-at-sergey-malinka#377797

      Delete
  33. Bennett and Havern are a vile pair of bullies targeting antis. They bullied then banned a long term member of their cesspit for disagreeing with them and when other members objected moved the discussion underground. Even their blinkered members are beginning to see that they're not what they claim to be, at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who was the member they banned?

      F

      Delete
    2. I won't put her full name 30 Nov 17:56 (as the hounds of hell have already got it in for her) but she is known as Cherry and is a valued long-time contributor to discussion on the case.

      Delete
  34. In reply to @anonymous 12.29

    You mean the CMoMM forum ?

    I have read it, and have to agree that it appears their main aim is to present a single convoluted nonsense 'theory' whilst simultaneously ridiculing others who question or cast doubt on the abduction theory.

    Only a handful of people have used their real identities and dared to put when their heads above the parapet by openly questioning the McCanns or the UK police investigation - Rosalinda Hutton, Pat Brown, Sonia Poulton, Colin Sutton - and ALL of them have been vilified by the CMoMM forum ( John Blacksmith is also on their target list, although he writes anonymously )

    They even reject Goncalo Amaral's conclusions for heaven's sake !

    When you speak of a "deal" are you saying you think perhaps an agreement was struck when Bennett lost the court case against the McCanns ?

    I must say, it is rather odd that he has been allowed to continue with his 'crusade' following that event, although I suppose his current agenda might actually be seen as being helpful to the McCann cause

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent post.

      F

      Delete
    2. Yes, 15:58 that's who I meant. The Malinka bashing continues, with some misguided fool praising the cesspit and being rapturously encouraged by baldy who modestly considers their "research" eclipses Amaral's investigation.

      Delete
  35. LOL..the great researcher.

    Re: Another look at Sergey Malinka
    Post by doisgaloes Today at 20:53

    Wow, I wish even 10% of words written here meant anything other than self-promotion of so-called investigation skills when all that you do here is copy/paste nonsense that others came up with. Mr. Bennett your posts are the most ridiculous of all. You like a puddle with a ball, u see if u want it, but u cant do shit to get it because of lack of imagination as copy/pasting is not that hard, using your brain is. I wish to address this message to everyone here. All of you have forgotten that there is a little girl missing, you play detectives and act like you know things, but nothing here helps little girl long forgotten by people that sit on this forum. Pull your heads out of your asses and start thinking instead of copying others nonsense, do proper research instead of publishing shit that others made up. Not one sentence on this website is true about me except my name and age.

    There are police files, even translated for people like you lot, yet you are too lazy or too stupid to read and understand them.

    Mr Bennett - you are a fake researcher and there is nothing left in your bag of tricks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many thanks to all for the Sergey posts. It's taken me a while to look into the cesspit, as it's such a depressing, seedy place, I avoid going there.

      I've now had a look and my advice to Sergey would be get yourself away asap. You have a young family and an interesting book to market, the malevolent inhabitants of the cesspit will kill all your ambitions stone dead. No-one thrives in the cesspit, they pull victims down into the sewage with them, and there they stay.

      Get onto the POSITIVE side of marketing your book Sergey. Open a blog or a facebook page and reach out to those millions curious about the Madeleine case, not the tiny handful of malcontents who occupy CMoMM.

      The majority of 'antis' - those who do not believe the McCanns, do not hold the same narrow, blinkered and always spiteful views, of those in the cesspit.

      They don't want you to succeed Sergey, ergo don't look to them for advice and encouragement, you will get the opposite as you have seen. And yes, it's all about money.

      Bennett, because he is such a crap writer, wants NO competition in the Madeleine canon. Imagine an over zealous guard dog protecting a side of beef. See the way he salivates and drools as he asks for a breakdown of how much you have earned thus far.

      Your book Sergey, has huge potential, but right now you really need to keep your head and you won't do that if you mix with malcontents trying to tear you down. Think of CMoMM as Britain First. A tiny, tiny group of hate filled fanatics who represent no-one but themselves.

      Delete
    2. Bang on the money Ros. You can almost feel the creeping resentment that someone else might get a slice of that pie. Baldy and crew are not even slightly inquisitive as to what Sergey Malinka may or may not bring to the table as it won't tie in with their carefully constructed tower of twaddle they call research.

      Delete
    3. The cesspit now think their Sergey is not THE Sergey now, on their forum. As usual, Sergey was given a welcome as warm as a rattle snake in a lucky dip. I hope this does not put him off. I doubt it. He knows now what a pitiful bunch they are on there.
      I for one am intrigued to hear from someone embroiled in the case. Remember, Murat still cuts an enigmatic figure and Sergey will know stacks more about him than we do. He will, hopefully, lets us know of any dirty dealings - he mentions bribes and blackmail - bringing to us the actuality of being caught up in something so huge.
      You never know; anyone and anything could snip the red tape around all this and let it all unravel so what better than someone who was in some way caught up in this debacle?
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    4. When I first started reading about the McCann case earlier in 2017 I couldn't understand why some of the anti's didn't like TB as at that time I just thought that he'd been used to show all the anti's not to discuss the case online and because I didn't know all the facts at this time I felt sorry for him, I now have a different opinion from what I've observed and learnt over the months. At the end of the day whether we agree or disagree the way Malinka was treated on CMOMM was terrible, he knows things that are not public knowledge and why should he disclose them on CMOMM.
      S

      Delete
  36. Re: Another look at Sergey Malinka
    Post by Copodenieve Today at 15:25

    Oh no, here we go again. So many have attempted time and time again to either bring the most important members of this forum to their knees or to lead readers like me in another direction away from truth and facts, but THEY CAN'T DO IT! They are just getting boring now.

    The most important members of this forum!

    They are certifiable.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Malinka is basically blustering because he can't and won't answer simple questions put to him. He says he can't speak English very well but seems to have great command of English swear words!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 00:36

      What “English swear words”? The censored ones, that keeps one guessing?

      “My book would be translated into several languages. I know none of you here give a [censored] about me or my book or 10 years of stolen life from me and I don't blame you. The only reason I joint this forum is to see for myself what sort of people can poor [censored] on the other person regardless of the outcome. I got my answer. I wish you luck in finding your truth, but remember each word written about somebody without facts proving it, is just another useless information that confuses what matters most - finding the truth!”

      https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14745p25-another-look-at-sergey-malinka#377828

      I don’t think ‘swear words’ provide support for an argument, but I consider ‘swear words’ words that express emotions, e.g. anger.

      “You might think that the definition of ‘bad’ words would be similar around the world. You wouldn’t be entirely right. Strong language – swearing, profanity, whatever you want to call it – is special.”

      http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20150306-how-to-swear-around-the-world

      Delete
  38. Who can blame him. Those egomaniacal loons would make a saint lose it!

    ReplyDelete
  39. "Brenda Leyland, one of many pro-active voices online asking questions and denouncing the McCann's version of events gets targetted by MSM. No criminal record. One of the McCann's biggest supporters stores thousands of images of child porn & charged and MSM are suddenly clueless."

    https://twitter.com/AfterTheLie/status/936365838206160896

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi anon 06.42.I wonder if the UK Police Force have investigated Mrs Brenda Leylands vile messages sent to her before her tragic death,having to become openly broadcast on Sky News Corporation,by Martin **nt,well her "secret address isn't a secret any more" was it Martin,proud of yourself and your thirty pieces of Silver from Murdochs Empire?
      Add to the fact of Mr Nessling possibly being associated to a CEOP leader,Dossier?
      What needs to be asked who threw"Nigel" under the Bus,informing a Judge of his"Interests"for the past Seven,Eight Years and CEOP unable to track down these culprits o 2009?
      So just why has MSM been so silent about the Indecent images and Nigel,are MSM part of the Cover Up,Fake News for the past ten years on Madeleine McCann's disappearance(Murdoch Empire,NoTW 1 Million,safe return of Madeleine,what did they already know?)
      Daniel Morgan Unsolved Murder,Thirty Years costing the UK Tax payer over One billion pounds in collapsed Trails,failed court cases,with extremely close links to Ruperts cohorts,Brooks,Coulson,Cameron,etc,Leveson,"we are all in this together"?

      Delete
  40. "one day I DM'd a pro who I shan't name. And was told Brenda's name, where she lived, about her son Ben"

    https://twitter.com/loverandomleigh/status/718169136447254528

    ReplyDelete
  41. Re: McCann supporter Nigel Nessling avoids prison after downloading more than 40,000 images of child porn
    Post by Get'emGonçalo Today at 10:59

    Too long to post but here's Textusa's take on the Nessling saga https://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/red-card.html?m=1

    A nonsense thread about whether Madeleine was seen after Sunday drones on for 20 pages. They really don't want Nigel Nessling discussed in the cesspit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Much like Ros doesn't want to discus it on here.

      Delete
    2. There is something 'not right' about the CMoMM forum.

      Whilst parading as a 'researched' archive of indisputable fact ( like some pretendy academic study ) what it actually does, in essence, is present a direct challenge to Goncalo Amaral.

      Could it be that the silly convoluted conspiracy theory it purports is merely a ridicule attracting 'aside' - it's real purpose being to dispute and dismiss Amaral's thesis and conclusions ?

      That would certainly explain why that forum is allowed to continue with impunity, despite Bennett being under legal censure.

      Delete
  42. Malinka gives you an opportunity to create a new blog Ros - once again you are days out of date.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you understand the difference between 'news' and 'muse' Unknown? No-where on here does it say 'breaking news'.

      YOU Unknown are solely responsible for what you read, the choice is yours. If my style doesn't suit your needs, may I suggest you find one that does?

      Delete
    2. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton1 December 2017 at 20:22

      Do you understand the difference between 'news' and 'muse' Unknown? No-where on here does it say 'breaking news'.

      No-where said that Nessling was "news" ages after the event, but you blogged about it.

      You style certainly doesn't suit my needs - do you want to take away my freedom to comment on here?

      Delete
  43. "by Verdi Today at 15:51
    CMoMM does not tolerate nor encourage personal abuse or disruption. If you have an issue with a specific member on the forum, you are asked to take it to PM, or better still thrash it out on twitter or facebook, whichever is your preference.

    If you persist with this combatative attitude you will no longer be welcome on the forum."

    verdi having a laugh

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I assume "disruption" refers to any questioning of the daft theory that Madeleine disappeared on Sunday ?

      The question I would "disrupt" the forum with ( if I was a member there ) is why the Sunday was arbitrarily chosen as 'disappearance day' ?

      There was nothing specific or unusual that appeared to happen on that day that I can see. If they want to run with the theory that something untoward happened earlier in the holiday, why not go with the night Mrs Fenn from upstairs heard all that crying ?

      At least that would present an anomaly on which to base their conspiracy theory. As it is they randomly selected the Sunday as 'D day' even though that meant having to discredit an important witness.

      Bizarre

      Delete
    2. It started very early on - either on anorak or 3As - someone came up with "there is no evidence that Madeleine was their on Thu" completely out of the blue. It had earlier been argued that Madeleine had never even gone to PDL.

      When the files were released and translated it became a long and continuing story (to this very day) that anyone and everyone who said they had seen Madeleine during the week was either a liar, mistaken, wrong, or had been got at by the Mccanns. This was to make everything fit with the questioning of the last photo.

      Delete
  44. Bennett was a pre May 3rd conspiraloon way back on 3a.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. bennett is so honest he gave the Police a false name when arrested for something to do with road signs!

      Delete
  45. Vee8:

    “I myself was an early victim. Not many days after the news of Madeleine’s abduction first broke I started leaving comments on the VirginMedia newspages. Every time a new update broke I was there, part of a new and burgeoning online community. But, foolish me, in my naivety I left my comments in my own name. Later, when I joined some of the forums set up in support of the McCanns I used the tag ‘Vee8’ one I have been using for years on all the hot rod and custom car forums I am a member of, including my own local club. But again I reckoned without the sleuthing abilities of those people who had by now become known as the anti-Madeleines. Because on my own clubs website my real name was in the personal details. It was no problem to put the two together. I had no idea of what was to follow. All my personal details, name, address, occupation, family members names, e-mail address, all was made public on one of the first, and now legendary, websites set up to actually persecute the McCanns, the 3arguidos forum. I admit that, at first, I was unaware of what was going on. It was difficult to believe such sites existed. But I soon found out when a friend tipped me off. She sent me a link. And it was all there. Warnings to stop supporting two child killers, threats that if I carried on I would receive a good kicking. Later I got e-mails, which I still have saved, accusing me of everything from causing an innocent man’s suicide, to being an actual paedophile. I was warned my car would be vandalised outside my house. And all this because I dared to publicly support two parents caught in a whirlwind of a nightmare.”

    http://amaralfiction.blogspot.nl/2011/03/fear-and-loathing-secret-heroes.html

    “All was made public”, yet he flew under the radar of CEOP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for posting that 20:30.

      He's right, in the early days the Madeleine forums were filled with thugs, though it seemed to me the most intimidating were supporters of the parents. Virtually everything that Nessling claims was happening to him, the McCann supporters were doing to others.

      I saw hundreds of people driven away from the Madeleine discussion forums, by threats that their identities and online activity would be forwarded to their friends, neighbours, employers etc. Most simply said 'I don't need this shit' and who could blame them.

      I am sceptical about the nature of the threats Nessling claims he received. In all the years I have watched this case, I have never seen any evidence of threats, from the McCanns or Nessling. Michael Wright was put on the spot and asked to produce evidence when he claimed threats were made against the twins.

      That's not to say there weren't lunatics on the anti side too, some of whom still remain. But the majority of fruitloops quickly moved on. And each anti forum and facebook page competed with each other as to who were the most respected.

      I think that's where all the 'rules and regulations' came in. It enabled the sanctimonious to live pretend lives as Hyacinth Buckets. Many revelled in the fact that THEY were far better parents than the group of chavvy doctors who went to the Algarve. There was much gloating.

      I think however, a lot of attitudes changed following the publication of Goncalo Amaral's book. Effectively, he did the opposite of what the parents claimed. He humanised them. It is obvious from his writing, that he has a deep understanding of human nature and human behaviour. He is surprisingly compassionate towards Kate, especially.

      Many of the forums were of course going from strength to strength, but the angry posts and the personal abuse of the McCanns, calmed down - in most places.

      In the early days the McCann supporters were prolific, fighting on every social media front, the readers comments in the popular newspapers especially. I joined the Mirror forum, but rarely if ever commented. Even as bold as I am, they were all too ferocious for me!

      Delete
  46. "I wrote this blog in the wee small hours, and a skim read of Nessling's website and the cesspit."

    Have you ever - repeat ever, come up with something new that you discovered or do you always blog about things that are being discussed in other places?

    ReplyDelete
  47. cesspit malinka thread gone underground now?

    ReplyDelete
  48. I think CMoMM, Petermac, HideHo, the lot of them, all made their minds up as to what happened back in 2007/8 and have been stuck in timewarp ever since.

    Of course the problems they have, is that the facts do not fit their theories, so they have altered them, and I think that is something every newcomer to this case should be warned about.

    Not only do they face volumes of tedious dialogue from Bennett, they will find when they reach the end, it was a complete waste of their time.

    For those who want to understand this case fully, and with as little actual work as possible,I suggest they read Goncalo Amaral's Truth of the Lie. It's an easy read, Goncalo is a gifted writer, and it gets straight to the heart of the matter. Easier still, watch the documentary.

    This is, even from the KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid)perspective, a fascinating and gripping tale, but it is all too easy to be drawn into groups whose motives are creepy and nothing at all to do with justice.

    I warn people about Bennett, because he could put them off reading and studying for life. And that goes directly against my own personal philosophy of education, education, education. I know he is not a teacher, but if he were, he would be the reason students threw out books and turned their backs on education.

    I know of course this is a human tragedy, but it is also a fascinating insight into what will probably be the crime of the century. It doesn't need embellishing, and it doesn't need sexing up. The more lurid allegations come from the dark imaginings of some seriously fecked up heads.

    Bennett was to be famous, but he has no discernible talents. He attached himself to the high profile Madeleine case, just as he attached himself to the Michael Barrymore case. In the first case I think, he set up a Trust, in the second a Foundation.

    His biggest crime however, is that he is a timewaster on every level, and that includes my own writing this. There is so much to read of real interest and with real insight, the tubthumpers are not worthy of anyone's time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 22:22 You are an idiot.

      Delete
    2. [Bennett] is a timewaster on every level, and that includes my own writing this. There is so much to read of real interest and with real insight, the tubthumpers ARE NOT WORTHY OF ANYONE'S TIME"

      What blatant hypocrisy. 90% of your blog is about Bennett and what is said on CMoMM, and when CMoMM forum said it was going to take a certain topic to the members lounge, you didn't seem to like that. I wonder what "new member" YOU are. After all, there have been a few people joining within the last 24 hours.

      However, regardless of you calling CMoMM forum "the cesspit", it seems that without the forum and Bennett, this blog would sink without trace.

      Delete
    3. It's a shame he wasn't a gifted detective.But write a book that appeals to the masses of vindictive and vicious vigilantes with too much time on their hands and empty lives and you don't need to be a gifted detective. The sainted Amaral has become the Jesus of McCann hatred.

      Ros, as is well publicised( by herself) is an expert in everything.her gifts extend to literary criticism now apparently :

      ''For those who want to understand this case fully, and with as little actual work as possible,I suggest they read Goncalo Amaral's Truth of the Lie. It's an easy read, Goncalo is a gifted writer, and it gets straight to the heart of the matter. Easier still, watch the documentary.''

      And for those who don't understand Ros fully, she wants as much pain to befall the parents of a missing child as possible and uses the excuse that they buried the child then faked an abduction to justify it. Don't ask her for evidence and don't ask her why the parents have never been arrested by any force investigating it.She'll go all around th world to say 'it's just obvious' and supply statistics that don't exist or tell you to watch the Amaral documentary or some other one from the History Channel. You see, Amaral was sure Murat was guilty.Then he was sure the child had been hidden in a fridge then moved by her parents,Then she was hidden in a coffin in a nearby church for a 'secret' cremation, and then buried.Yes, a gifted writer.Don't ask him why no forensic evidence nailed anyone.Don't ask Ros either. Just use Ros and Amaral for a comprehensive in depth look at the one area they like.Amaral was removed from the case.That bit isn't fiction at least.

      Delete
  49. Bennett works for the McCann. It's that simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bennetts research skills appear to be contagious.

      Delete
    2. No. You are that simple. The reality is really quite complex.

      Delete
    3. Hi Ros,I don't wish to cause conflict between you and Mr Bennett,so perhaps on that front agree to disagree on thesis?
      If the Operation Grange(Farce)saga is about to close,(Top Shelf,please)unable to reach an understanding,Portugal PJ?
      Perhaps it is the"final"positioning of who knows most of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann,that is being fought out,but it should be for Justice in memory of Madeleine?
      An innocent child caught up in a convoluted quagmire of Spin meisters,(MI5)brought in to decimate Madeleine McCann's investigation from the start?
      The Tapas 7/9,Kate,Gerry were,are all Adults and it is on their conscious behaviour that they acted from the 3 May 2007,no matter who held a psitol to whose head to cause deceit,they are responsible for their actions?
      Therefore if any Criminal charges are to brought against them,it is for their actions they chose to obide by(Free masons)code of conduct,protect the Brotherhood at all costs, to even commit Perjury?

      Delete