Monday, 14 September 2015



Without any doubt whatsoever, the missing Madeleine Campaign was a media phenomenon.  The attractive, cherubic face of the almost 4 year old revamped and revitalised the entire missing children industry, both here and in the USA - (did Gerry seriously expect to find her in Washington?).  This missing child, wasn't an unappealing spotty and surly teenager who had argued with his/her stepdad and run away to the big city - the bulk of their day to day business - it was a photogenic toddler, a D.W. Griffiths blonde angel, stolen in the night by a dark, threatening stranger, one who hid in the bushes, watching and waiting for his moment to pounce.  A lurking, predatory danger that threatens the very fabric of our society.   The bogeyman made flesh. 

Imagine launching an industry, or revitalising an old one, with the face of the world's top model stamped on every product?  Add several kilos of syrup, a backstory that would bring a tear to the eye of cynical old Simon Cowell and you can start printing million dollar notes. 

Imagine then, that you have a government staggering to keep control, a leader with a fragile ego, desperate to make the people like him, and a popular cause that the public have leapt onto?  In 2007, Gordon Brown wanted/needed a popular bandwagon to jump onto - a cause that would unite him with 'the people', a cause that crossed all class barriers - the UK were united in wanting to find Madeleine McCann.  Her parents had experienced their worst nightmare, everyone wanted to help them, and the Labour Press Office had people like Clarence Mitchell, who could point out how good they would all look wearing yellow ribbons for Maddie. 

Tis my own belief that whoever in Downing Street took that first call on the morning of 4th May 2007, got so carried away with media potential and the opportunity to portray themselves, Gordon Brown in particular, as compassionate, caring fathers and mothers, must have seemed like manna from heaven.  The idea that the parents could have been involved in their daughter's disappearance either never entered their career focused heads or it took several hours/days for that big Oops moment to kick in. 

Were the Labour Government so naïve that they didn't check out the abduction for themselves?  I can't say I know very much about MI5 and MI6, but were they too sitting there wiping away the tears and passing around the collection hat?  Were the cream of the UK's police and all the special forces taken in and convinced by the phoney performances of Gerry and Kate McCann and the distasteful tales of child neglect from the Tapas 7? 

The first two Portuguese policemen who arrived at the scene on 3rd May, spotted the strange behaviour instantly.  Kate describes them in her book as Tweedledum and Tweedledee, thereby establishing, not only what a vile, ungrateful woman she is, but also establishing that she and her equally charmless husband, were always going to blame the Portuguese police.  And lucky them, the British Establishment were going to join in that too. 

I think Gordon Brown was desperate to be a popular Prime Minister, but he just didn't cut the mustard, he lacked the charisma of Bill Clinton, the boyish charm of Tony Blair and even the 'authority' of Margaret Thatcher.  In an age where world leaders are chosen as much on their good looks and electibility as their policies, Gordon Brown was a throwback to the ugly mugs of Harold Wilson and Dennis Healy, that is, leaders now are not so much the peoples' choice, as the choice of the Party's PR Department. 

As we all know, Gordon Brown worked his passage, he had earned the crown, no one more than he, had sacrificed so much. Despite having the rug whipped from beneath his feet all those years ago, he had reluctantly settled for the role of wing man and bided his time.  He not only wanted to succeed Tony Blair, he wanted to surpass him, nothing like a niggling grudge and years of resentment to drive ambition on.  Blair had swept to power on wave of public adoration, but he left under a cloud - the public's love was there for the taking.

I don't doubt Mr. Brown's financial genius (what do I know), but unfortunately for him, you've either got, or you haven't got, charm, and sadly for him, not only does he lack it, he doesn't understand it.  He comes from the Methodist ethos that hard work and dedication should be reward in itself, or more accurately, it should be recognised and appreciated by others (the masses) without the need for the martyr to blow his own trumpet.  The more saintly among us do their good works  silently and in sack cloth, in the knowledge that the Good Lord knows what they do, and a press leak here and there doesn't hurt. 

It could be argued, quite successfully I think, the incumbent British Government made a huge mistake by intervening in the Portuguese Investigation, but then used that mistake for a multitude of sinister agendas.  The case of missing Madeleine had nothing whatsoever to do with the online protection of children - Maddie wasn't even 4 years old.  But it coincided with every governments' need to get control of information - a cause strong enough for every parent and everyone who cares about children, to give the authorities permission to access their confidential online activity. Those not agreeing, obviously being child haters and perverts.  Those shouting 'think of the children' know they will always have a wave of popular support, it follows 'terrorist threats' in the 'how to gain control and stay popular' section of 'Every Tyrant's Handguide'.  Sexual perversion in these anything goes times, brings out the ire in very few these days, but throw kids into the mix and you can still raise a formidable angry mob. 

Two cards are teetering at the very top of this particular fluttering house, the blame can't be laid entirely at the door of Mr. Brown, Tony and the gushing Cherie, were veritable angels of mercy to the stricken parents.  So, two Prime Ministers, and several Home Secretaries, must convince the public that they had no way of knowing that the McCanns' abduction story may have been a fib? 


  1. Good perception Ros, and probably a lot nearer the reality than two chav medics from the boonies who just happen to have Brown's phone number on speed dial.

  2. Brilliant again cristobell. I seem to say after everyone one of your posts... The best yet ....I do believe your writings are getting better and better each time. I fully agree that in Gordon Browns case it was an attempt to replicate the PR success that Tony Blair had when he first became PM following the tragic death of Princess Di. If you recall he used the mass hysteria created by the media to set himself up as the hero and eventually force the queen against her better judgements to return 2 little boys who had just lost their mum to London to face an hysterical crowd instead of protecting them in the haven she had created for them in Scotland. If you believe the Helen Mirren version of events the queen was well aware of what he was at when she said to him Diana's death greatly helped your image didn't it Mr Blair .....or words to that effect.
    I have said time and again it wasn't that there were dark hands within the government ready to jump to the aid of a couple of very unlikeable nobodies. It had worked for Tony Blair in 1997 when it was against the queen so why not work again in 2007 when the opposition in the form of the portuguese wasn't quite as powerful or well liked.
    As for the USA once it was seen that the PM had jumped on board the next step for Gerry was to try and get the yanks on board I think it took them a bit less time to figure out what was going on and they were long sending him packing

  3. "what do I know"


  4. I know more than you, lol. Most people do, including the Portuguese police, who spotted the weird behaviour immediately - for future reference, all the codswollop about parents grieving in different ways, was just that codswollop. Too many of us have suffered real grief, we know what it looks like and we know what it feels like. The idea of setting up an online shop and turning a missing child into a global marketing product within days of that child's loss is abhorrent to most of us, it was unbelievable then, and the passage of time hasn't it any favours, its even more unbelievable now. The Portuguese police are, it appears, way ahead of their British counterparts, they understand the basic scientific principle 'if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it is probably a duck'. An essential, one would have thought, for Chapter One of 'How to become an Ace Detective'.

    Not only did it appear that the British police were bereft of this vital piece of sound advice, they were also totally oblivious to the fact that the main suspects were telling them whopping great big porkies. Body language, forensic linguistics and spotting lies, is not a new science. Arguably some of the old thief takers were naturals, but if these sciences are not applied in the detection of crime, then why aren't they? And if they have been applied in this case, then everyone from the experts at the top to the enforcers at the bottom, should be urgently re-assessed, because they clearly don't their arses from their elbows.

    The indecent haste to make money out of their missing daughter, their need to control the investigation, and the dire acting skills of Gerry and Kate was as plain as the elongated nose on Pinocchio's face. Whilst the rest of the world was admiring Kate and Gerry's finery, an online community sprung up of outcasts, people like the little boy, bold enough to point out the Emperor wasn't wearing any clothes. People who could see the lies and people who questioned the McCanns' demands for punitive changes to our libel, criminal and news reporting laws. A backdoor way in which to persuade the public to welcome policing of the internet. Since McCann, journalists have been imprisoned, yes, here in the UK! Journalists have never been latter day saints, and if they were, they wouldn't be any bleddy good. We don't want our newspapers, de-loused, boil washed and starched before it reaches us, we want it raw, live and real. And it takes the bad guys to get us the good stories! If the trend to imprison journalists continues, then the public will get what the public asked for, sanitised news.

    But I digress, as long the inner core of this particular circle of hell, continues to lie, the ripples will keep spreading outwards. More people become involved, kids grow up, relationships change, the risks become greater and the truth closes in. It won't go away, it can't go away. How do you stand in a witness box, and repeat a story you didn't have faith in when you told it the first time around! And one that hasn't been improved on in 8 years?

  5. Whilst agreeing with most of the above post, this line should not go unchallenged:

    'Body language, forensic linguistics and spotting lies, is not a new science.'

    The study of body language is not a science in the Newtonian sense - it is
    merely an indicator - bit like the wonder dogs - only indicate - not prove anything.

    To put it simply - someone entering a room, standing in the corner with his/her arms crossed - might INDICATE a defensive stance/attitude - it could also mean
    the person is feeling a tad chilly.

    Big difference.

  6. @Anon 01.22
    But the 'feeling a tad chilly' person would show more than just crossing arms, just as the 'defensive' one would show more indications than crossed arms. Eyes, facial expressions, speech, choice of words etc. Now there's the big difference between feeling a tad chilly and having a defensive stance/attitude. The whole picture makes the red herring, not just one detail.

  7. @ 19.55

    'Eyes, facial expressions, speech, choice of words etc.'

    Speech/choice of words - are not body language - they fall into linguistics - whole different kettle of fish

    Eyes/facial expression are indeed part of body language - but boy can one get that one wrong. I direct you to an article in the MSM today about an MP - who the BBC 'caught' in the House of Commons - Alec Shelbrooke (Con), allegedly napping.

    In fact the gentleman in question is partially deaf and tried to listen to the loudspeaker embedded in his seat - the Beeb had to apologise for their very flawed observation of his 'body language'.

    Every picture tells a story - but not every picture tells the true story.

  8. No, it's not a whole different kettle of fish. When the body language goes hand in hand with linguistics, over and over repeatedly for years, a behavioural pattern is there for all to see. Not just one picture up for interpretation by one or two...No, we're taking about lots and lots of videos captured due to constant media exposure. The masks hiding the truth couldn't be more visible

    1. Behavioural patterns - cool - but just indications
      Dog alerts without corrobarative scientific finds - cool - but just indications

      I don't like what I've seen of K&G either - they seem to be in a constant loop of 'Abigail's party'.

      But unless/until we have evidence of their wrong doing (beyond the proven child neglect) - and not just indications/hunches/glory hunting South African weirdos' findings

      We are stymied

      The sooner the truth romantics on these boards wake up to this - the better

  9. Jerry McCann certainly wasn't ''feeling a tad chilly'' when being interviewed in one of the video's, they'd obviously put him on the spot by asking an awkward question that he wasn't prepared to answer. Off came the microphone, and off he scarped to get some fresh air leaving Kate fanning her face and at the mercy of the interviewer.

    Every picture does tell a story 00:24 and I believe it told a true story and a lot more besides. ''Eyes/ facial expressions are indeed part of body language - but boy can one get that one wrong''. What next, you'll be saying the dogs got it wrong too!!!

  10. Where did the awkward questions go, by the way?? They were rather frequent in 2007-2008. Totally unprepared at times, the answers they came up with were equally awkward or should I say shocking ("ask the dogs, Sandra")
    The best example ever of a Duper's delight is when Gerry and Kate get the question whether their emotions are going on a rollercoaster each time there's a reported sighting of Madeleine...and Gerry's face. THAT SMIRK.