Wednesday 26 October 2016


UPDATE - 28.10.16

Now that the fog of my tantrum has subsided, my reasoning, such as it is, lol, has returned.  In closing my Blog, I am effectively censoring myself!  Doh! I want my work to be read, it would be daft to say I don't.

Anyway, this has indeed been a bit of a watershed, and there's nothing wrong with them!  I'm delighted to say, I have (since 4.00am), been working on a book I have been planning in my head for over 30+ years.  I have returned to my favourite genre, comedy, well comedy mixed with the kind of advice you can take, leave, or laugh at. 

But as my critics have so eloquently pointed out, it's about time I got down to a bit of hard work!  I'm still around, and I will still comment if and when I feel like it, but I've given myself a Christmas deadline!

Ps.  To those who think I've hit the bottle (again, groan).  I've turned into one of those little old ladies who giggle, sing and pass out after one small sherry, all under an hour, being fully compos mentis by teatime.   

UPDATE - 27.10.16 

I may have the hind of a rhino, but the sheer viciousness of the attacks on me have got through.  I'm shutting my blog shortly, while I reconsider it's future.  Typing this with burned fingers and a hugely dented ego, I feel I am providing (free) entertainment to an audience who clearly despise me personally. 

It has actually triggered a rather sad childhood memory.  When my brother and I, with our thick Irish accents started primary school in posh Virginia Water, our voices gave all the other kids, and indeed the teachers, much opportunity to mock us.  I remember at the age of 5 being taken up onto the assembly stage with my 6 year old brother so the headmaster could get us to speak into the microphone and make everyone laugh. We didn't care - we were Irish kids, our granny had taught us put on a show and take a bow, from the moment we could toddle.  We even fought as we got off stage, about who got the most laughs. 

It took me a lifetime to understand that they weren't laughing with us, they were laughing at us.  I still struggle to understand it now, but understand it, I must.   At the moment, I have to face the reality that I am giving my all to a project that keeps me in the poverty to which I have become way too accustomed.  For an audience, who on the whole, hate me. This may be the wake up call I need, perhaps it is time to write that book or put my energies into something more lucrative  My dream, that one day, writing for a living, or at least trying to, will be acknowledged as a real job, rather than an excuse to sit on one's arse all day!  Don't get me started on the life on a writer (or maybe I should, there will be many who empathise!). I think if I had a chance to start out again, I would opt for the Stepford route! And yes, I'm laughing.

And to those who think, she's up herself because she's got a blog, the penalty I have paid by not being aloof like other writers, was a risk I was happy to take.   It may be I got it wrong, I often do, it's no big deal.  Among my dear old dad's (frequent) tut tuts and rants were the words 'you never learn do ya?'.  I expect he is sat on a cloud somewhere with my barmy mum, drinking and saying 'och, Jesus!'.  (Bugsy, can ya check my grammar, ta). 

And yes, pushing a broom or stacking shelves is beneath me!  I haven't spent a lifetime studying to break rocks for the entertainment of those who work 9 to 5pm.  It is a real job for me.  I agree with my critics, I must be crap, but that only makes me try harder.  I will never, ever, give up.  My dream is to make a living writing, if that is the root of all evil, shoot me now. 

For those fearing for my mental health (I have rediscovered alcohol), fear not, I am in a giggly mood, and have the company of SMS (Smart Arsed Son) and the mentality of those who believe I should get a 'real' job.  We are presently squabbling about which one of us is the Mentalist, lol. 

Ps.  Bugsy, please can you edit, slightly tipsy and not giving a f*ck. 

UPDATE - 26.10.16

As expected, my donation button has caused outrage!  So many sharp intakes of breath, I though we were having a typhoon.  I have therefore decided to respond to the main criticisms by category to save us all time. 

To those who say, I am cashing in on a missing child, I am a writer, who by some cruel twist of fate has become shackled to this unfortunate case, for what seems to be an eternity.  I will not lie, it has always been my intention to write about the Madeleine mystery (I still dream of that bestseller) but thus far, it is a story without an ending, and I'm not just going to make one up!  At the moment my Madeleine text is a living narrative, still filled with twists, turns and machinations.  My blog is a work in progress, I value my readers' input as much as my own, it is a journal if you like, which I hope is capturing the zeitgeist. 

As for the morality of writing about a tragic child, my critics should bear in mind, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of journalists writing about tragic children every day of the week. Should child stories be withdrawn from their paypackets?   The Madeleine case is still of interest to thousands, their doing, not mine, and my blog has become a niche corner of the internet where this human interest story can be discussed civilly, rationally as reasonable adults.   

 I have always given my honest and educated opinion on this case, I am one of the (very) few writers to have stood up to the McCann takeover of the media, and for that I am blacklisted.  I have never given in to their demands and I never will, even if it means carving the truth of the lie on a prison wall.  I am as outraged at the injustice in this case as I ever was.  Rightly, or wrongly, I now have a large audience, to whom, I hope, I am providing a service that they cannot get from the mainstream media, an analysis of the true story behind this cover up. 
Many writers are now self publishing online and asking for donations, we have a skill we are happy to share for free, but we also have to eat. Much as I hate to be a diva (a lie, I love it!), all we have declare is our talent!  As newpapers and magazines are losing thousands of sales, they too are adding donation buttons. Writing is a profession like any other, if my articles were appearing in the mainstream media, I would be paid. 

Those who say there is far more work involved in filing, indexing and collecting data than there is in creative writing could Not insult me more!  I live, breathe and sleep my work, it fills every moment of my life and I am often at my (worn out) keyboard for up to 14 hours a day.  I'm a perfectionist, and I'm not bragging, because in my mind, I am never good enough, I have the same philosophy as Animal Farm's Boxer, I must work harder.  

My blogs may appear to be simplistic, easy reading that just comes off the top of my head, but that is a skill that has taken decades to perfect.  I take the entire McCann canon, all the heavy reading, facts, data and opinion, and I condense it down into bite size easy reading for those who follow this case, those who are new to it and those who would like an explanation as to what is going on.  Some may not consider that to be worth the price of a cup of coffee, but I'm hoping that there are many decent people out there who will think it is! 


After much tossing, turning and questioning of conscience, I have decided to add a donate button to my blog.  Unfortunately, writing about the case of missing Madeleine McCann can be seriously detrimental to a writer's career!

For me, writing about the Madeleine case is not an option. I know too much about this case to keep silent in the face of such obvious and manipulative lies.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing said Edmund Burke.  And a lot of good men and good women have challenged the establishment lies in the case of missing Madeleine from the start.  The assumption of politicians, their spin doctors and newspaper editors that the public are headline skimming morons they can bend and twist at will offends me.  This generation have grown up in an age of technology and information. we are no longer reliant on censored news. We can and do, seek out alternate opinions that have never been available in our mainstream press (and never will be). 

There are of course, hundreds if not thousands, of decent people out there, who are appalled that a child lost her life, and appalled that our government, our media, and even our police, became complicit in covering up the truth. People who are appalled that the innocent, Goncalo Amaral, Brenda Leyland and every poor sod who's face is splashed across the tabloids as Madeleine's abductor are having their lives destroyed to protect this mother of all crimes. 

I don't claim to know what happened to Madeleine, like many of my readers, this case for me has been a journey of discovery.  A bit like The Matrix, do you take the blue pill, or the red pill? Take the blue pill and accept Madeleine was abducted, and the story ends.  Take the red pill, and you are hurled into a nightmare reality - there is no turning back.  I imagine explaining to my trusting old Dad, that the Labour government and the newspapers lied to us and I can see the sickening disappointment on his face. 
Unfortunately, writing about this case has not been without personal loss.  Having featured in the McCann Supporters' Blacklist (Death Dossier) for several years and having several troll sites devoted to me, my work will never been accepted by the mainstream.  Ce la vie. 

I have therefore decided to put up a 'donate' button (right hand column), things break down and parts wear out, and I am determined to last this case out until the end!  If you enjoy my blogs and would like to contribute a small amount to its' upkeep, the price of a magazine or a large G&T, it would be much appreciated! 

Tuesday 25 October 2016


In response to 13:22 on 'Loony Website', I agree the Gasper statements are alarming, so too the evidence volunteered by the social worker Yvonne Martin, but they are not evidence that the tapas children were being abused. The PJ did not release ALL their files, many were held back, and there is a good chance those files contain the more err, sensitive investigations. Obviously investigations that were not pursued because they led nowhere. 

I think the evidence of Yvonne Martin (the social worker) is important because it describes the strange behaviour of Kate McCann and David Payne on the morning of 4th May.  And by strange behaviour, I mean the way Kate, Payne and the rest of the Tapas group closed ranks - that is they shunned the assistance of a British child protection expert on the ground when their need was greatest. With regard to Yvonne Martin's suspicions about David Payne, I tend to think these would have been checked out by both the police and social services. 

The Jon Corner pictures were odd, but then so too is Jon Corner. Like the rest of the McCann mob, he spotted a business opportunity that was too good miss. The wannabe film maker and artiste, probably thought his work on the Madeleine case, would hurtle him into the big league.  As for the make up pictures, little girls love dressing up! Friend of the family and artiste Jon, no doubt had his camera handy and played along with Madeleine's game. 

I doubt very much paedophilia has got anything to do with this case, despite the huge efforts of so many, including the 'authorities' to convince the public that it has. People like Jim Gamble who have tried desperately to link Madeleine's disappearance to online predators. Always a ridiculous concept btw, because at the age of 3, Madeleine didn't use social media.

As for the parents and their friends, I cannot stress enough that these people were 'into each other' not kids!  They spent as little time with their children as they could get away with. Small children have no filters! It is ludicrous to suggest that these kids were being sexually abused in the evening and then handed over to the care of others the following morning. 

Those examining photographs with a magnifying glass searching for hints of abuse have lost the plot! They have certainly put reason, common sense and logical thinking to one side in order to prove their point.  They are projecting figments of their own rather lurid imaginations.  The majority of us do not think as they do, we don't see sexuality in small children and we don't assume a man with a camera is a pervert. 

This case is bizarre, because both the Pro McCann supporters and way too many of the Anti McCanns are determined to push forward a 'lets hang all the paedophiles' agenda.  From the 'Pro' side, one of the first claims made by the parents was that their daughter was taken by a gang of paedophiles.  This was quickly latched onto by the press and various police agencies and charities, who coincidentally, also want to convince the public their children are in constant danger.   

The McCanns of course, have been looking for a villain to blame for Madeleine's disappearance from day 1, Jim Gamble is always looking for reasons to seize people's computers, and police agencies and charities are always looking for cash to combat the alleged hidden danger of all these paedophiles lurking in bedsits and cyber cafes. Apparently enough children go missing each year to fill an inner city school.  Who knew? 

Many of the Antis do actually hate the McCanns.  In the fullest sense of the word, along with all it's scary connotations.  Not only do they want them burned at the stake, they want them (and everyone like them) to be humiliated and scorned.  Not dissimilar to the feelings the McCanns and their supporters had for Brenda Leyland and still have for Goncalo Amaral.  I doubt there is anything more humiliating or degrading than to be accused of sexually abusing children, therefore it is an inevitable accusation when accompanied by intense hatred.  Chuck in these people hid the child's body and carried on with their holiday for 5 days, and the monstering is complete.

But I don't want to be too harsh, whilst the psychotic hatred is indeed psychotic, the hatred felt by many is understandable when compared to  public feeling for convicted child murderers.  Child murder arouses feelings of passion and anger in most of us, feelings that are beyond our control. Even as a committed pacifist and wuss, I know that I could not be in a room with Ian Huntley without wanting to physically attack him.  

Some who have followed and studied this case struggle to get beyond the 'evil' that went on that night, that is the reality of whatever it was that happened to the poor little girl that made her disappear.  For myself, it is an issue that I try not to think about too intensely, because I know that emotion can distort reasoning.  I want to understand this case from a rational, academic, perspective, with my own personal feelings set aside. 

I think what grated for many was the almost joyous way the parents behaved and indeed thrived, in the days and weeks following Madeleine's disappearance. Pleas for publicity and cash, rather than pleas for on the ground searchers.  None of it was 'natural', but pointing that out became taboo. Who knows how parents of a missing child should act was the argument put forward by the defenders.  The obvious answer was, well most of us would have pretty good idea and it would include personally digging up the surrounding area with our bare hands. 

There is much about Gerry and Kate that puts people's backs up.  Despite all the 'kids were perfectly safe' propaganda, most are still very uncomfortable with the McCanns form of child minding.  Gerry's 'it would have been worse if ALL 3 were taken', was shocking as it was being used to defend his parenting skills. If all 3 had been killed in a fire, there would be no defence!  Aggh, I'm going down a path I didn't want to.  Reasons to dislike K&G, there are too many to list, but none worthy of sharpening up the pitchforks. 

Quite obviously in this case, any hint from the police and authorities that Gerry and Kate were involved could set off a media frenzy and quite possibly, an ugly, public backlash from those who were taken in.  And the backlash would not only involve the families, it would affect every politician, police chief, celebrity and expert who gave their full support to the parents. 

There are many reasons I believe for allowing the case to hang in limbo. Time is probably the most effective way to allow an angry public to move on.  If and when the case is ever solved, it will probably be announced in the left hand column, page 6 of a local newspaper. As I have said many times, police the world over, accept that there are occasions when they have to playing the waiting game. 

The lack of a result in the McCann case is far from unusual, but the conspiraloons simply cannot accept this.  They have done their own investigations and found the parents guilty.  Their simple minds cannot understand why the police have not acted on the information they have supplied or thanked them publically for solving the case.  Bennett believes he should be wearing ermine by now whilst publishers are in a bidding war for his book 'Homos and Paedos Everywhere'.   

But of course, I'm not immune to the rather tacky, greedy character traits of the parents.  Gerry and Kate are probably the least likeable people I can think of.  As a grumpy old bird, I have zero tolerance for people who use their victim status to manipulate others.  The McCanns have made it their life's work, in fact, at one time, they were the MSM's first point of call victims for any tragedy. Who suffered the most from the lawless press?  'Me, me, me' shout Gerry and Kate. 

However, I think it is important for anyone interested in this case to look carefully at BOTH sides.  I don't mean the abduction story, which is clearly bollox, I mean from a human perspective and the way in which it affects the families involved.  We are not Judge and Jury, and we certainly shouldn't judge these people on the conspiraloon theories of Bennett, HideHo and Textusa.  Theories based on limited access to almost 10 year police files.  Kudos to the creativity, but in real investigations you can't just fill in the gaps with memories of News of the World headlines.  And sexing up the disappearance of a child goes beyond crass and into the area of abhorrent. 

Those who feel hatred to the intensity where they want their enemies boiled in oil, really do need to have a lie down with a mind improving book.  And I include myself in this when I think of Ian Huntley.  He couldn't control his madness, but I can control mine, that's what sets us apart.  In the case of Huntley, we know what happened (the bastard), but in the Madeleine case, we don't.  Those trying to spice the story up by saying the child's body was stored for 5 days while the group continued their holiday are in fact stirring up hatred.  For them the rocks already being thrown at the parents are not enough, there must be something darker and more murky than an accident. 

I think it is right that we should continue to challenge every lie put forward by to promote the fake abduction.  It is wrong on every level that innocent men are having their lives wrecked by accusations that they took Maddie.  And it's wrong on every level that the parents, and indeed, countless others, have profited from this child's disappearance, knowing that she was never in fact missing.

Neither the McCanns or anyone involved in the real conspiracy are getting away with anything.  They are already living with a Tell Tale Heart, and they must spend the rest of their lives as their alter ego, religious nut job, goody two shoes, middle class Stepford family they created for their media campaign.  Never to laugh, smile, or have a humdinger row for ever more, or gawd forbid, miss church on Sunday.  All of the aforementioned would give me the screaming abdabs! 

Meanwhile, hatred is a negative emotion that does far more harm to the hater than the hatee.  For one thing, the object of the hatred is usually blissfully unaware of the demonic thoughts going on in the hater's head.  Even if they knew, those with self esteem, would see the problem as the hater's, not theirs. I actually find it quite amusing, and indeed a tad flattering, that I have enemies out there pouring over my every word looking for something to be offended by.  I occasionally toss them a juicy bit of ribeye to keep to keep them going, lol. 

Hating strangers isn't rational and hating people for a crime we think they have committed is immoral and uncivilized.  Especially if those beliefs are based on the crazed rantings of a man who is quite clearly off his trolley*.  Inventing lurid scenarios to make the villains more villainish and the crime more heinous reveals more about the armchair detective than the crime they are 'researching'. 

*Yes, I know, lol, I need help!  I really do try my hardest not to hate anyone, but in Bennett's case, I keep losing the battle ;)

Wednesday 19 October 2016



It seems to me that Freedom of Speech is under more threat today than it has been for a couple of hundred years.  It has been replaced by the Right to be Offended, some are even going so far as to ban words from our lexicon, the words in the Red Flag should now be sung 'while namby pambies flinch, and people with alternate opinions, sneer' we'll keep the Red (no offence to ginger people) flag flying here. 

Take this whole issue of misogyny. As an old bird (I can call myself that because I am one), I often have a chat and giggle with other old birds, and all of us (without exception), loved getting wolf whistles, saucy winks and offers to join the mile high club (Ok, made the last one up, but it remains on the wish list).  Too few men as it is, have the guts to suggest a quicky before work, ffs, the last thing feisty gals need are more laws to nobble the rest of them. It's no wonder most dating is done online these days, 'come and see my etchings' would see a young man imprisoned and placed on the Sex Offenders Register.

Of course, there will always be the creepy types out there who think flirting copping a feel and drooling 'cooorrr' is a turn on, eg. Donald Trump, but this is where stilettoes and elbows should be put to full use.  Actually the DT reference kind of negates my argument, I can't think of anything more traumatising than being groped by Donald Trump. 

But back to Freedom of Speech.  It's like everything George Orwell predicted is coming true.  Words are being erased or their meanings changed.  The freedom of information brought to us by the WorldWideWeb, has given a voice to everyone.  There are no valid or moral reasons for the 'authorities' to deprive individuals of internet access (their ultimate goal) and they couldn't even if they wanted to.  The only way in which to challenge those online who hold subversive views, is to accuse them of 'trolling'.  The more they convince the public that 'trolling' is an evil and heinous crime, the more likelihood of passing laws that will enable them to police the internet and round up their targets. 

Which takes us back to Freedom of Speech.  I am unashamedly a fan of Celebrity Big Brother, but I found the eviction of Christopher Biggins, deeply disturbing.  I didn't agree with his views or those of Renee (?), but I would have liked to see the discussion develop as it would in real life and as in real life, the better argument would win.  I'm afraid I have little time or patience with people who go through life carrying their Right to be Offended like a banner.  They leap on their opponent's argument, sifting through it with a fine tooth comb, or a wordsearch for Woman, Jew, Race, Age etc.  Who was that wailing creature weeping for, the entire Jewish race or her need for camera time?

As for CB's views on bisexuals, OK, they don't go along with popular opinion, but for all the bisexuals out there (and those who have dabbled), it would have made an interesting and enlightening discussion.  Quite clearly CB is not a hate preacher, and no doubt his views would have mellowed or changed if offered alternate opinions.  Unfortunately, CB's views are representative of a small minority, who's prejudices will no doubt continue because their views were stifled rather than challenged. It's like smacking a toddler without telling them what they did wrong. 

But the CBB incident is but a symptom.  Those who demand the Right to be Offended are starting to outnumber those of us who couldn't give a monkey's and it's their rules that going to be enforced.  Having been trolled, stalked and harassed for almost 10 years, I can confidently confirm that it is only detrimental to your health and well being if you allow it to be.  Once you understand the problem lies with the misfit, weirdo, chickenshit, not yourself, everything falls back into perspective. 

I find this move to prohibit words, language, comedy, lively discussion, sinister and undoubtedly motived by something evil.  For example, I would much rather see the Labour Party have a healthy debate about anti Semitism, Misogyny etc, unhindered by rules that restrict the language and the words used.  This whole idea of nicey, nicey politics, backed up with penalties appears to have gagged politicians to the point where the only means of communication they have left is a right hook. 

Stalking or harassing another individual online or anywhere else is against the Law.  There is no case for new Laws or the strengthening of existing laws to weed out those deemed subversive.  All those offended by what they read online have the right to reply, as we all do and they have the means to block the offenders.  Having your enemies imprisoned shouldn't be an option.

To those pleading the Right to be Offended, I would ask, why should the social media use of billions worldwide be restricted because your haven't got the social or internet skills to handles yourselves online.  You may choose to live in a sanitised bubble, but that would not be the choice for most of us.

Sunday 16 October 2016


Following the McCann case has often led to one of those big life questions, 'is it me, or is it them?'.  Considering I spend most of my life out of step with the rest of the world, it wasn't a particularly big deal, but I have to say, it was quite unsettling to discover the 'antis' hated me almost as much as the Pros, if not more! 

And I don't just mean mild dislike, I mean pure unadulterated hatred of the creepy kind.  They don't seem to realise that all that hatred means nothing, they don't know me, but it is probably eating them alive.  It's why I have been less mean of late, I actually pity them, hanging onto that anonymity may become very difficult in the days that lie ahead. 

I have to say, that the way in which the 'anti McCanns' became so reviled, so quickly, confused me.  I put it all down to the unbelievably successful McCann Media campaign.  Hands up, it has taken me a number of years to fully understand why those defending the McCanns were so emotive, and why they were so angry at McCann critics.  I'll admit in those early days, I was caught up in the excitement of unravelling a crime, and I actively sought out websites and forums who could see the same as I could.  It was a topic you could not discuss at the water cooler or a party without starting a fight!

Every national newspaper's comments sections were buzzing, the Mirror especially, and when Clarence had them shut down, thousands flocked to the 3 Arguidoes and then onto other forums as the founders of the 3As fell out.  All and any accusations by the McCanns that there has ever been an 'organised' campaign against them would be ridiculous, most of the antis hate each other as much as they hate the McCanns. 

I didn't dare post in the Mirror forum, I felt completely out of my depth, I had already got my fingers burned in the CBB chatroom, and bookchat had FA to do with books, but the McCann world was a battleground!  I cut my teeth in the completely uncensored free for all that was the AOL Europe Board. As old and wizened as I was, I had no idea there were so many lunatics out there disguised as normal people and UKIP voters.  The board was very right wing and mostly made up of neo Nazis and McCann supporters.  In retrospect, describing myself as a Marxist/Feminist in my profile was never going to make me popular. 

As horrendous and God awful as it sounds, the place became completely addictive, you could get a row with anyone any time of the day or night.  The antis were mostly made up of angry mums and nans, who made no bones about their feelings towards Kate and Gerry. I often found their comments a bit strong, but I liked them nonetheless and during especially bloody battles I was glad to have them as comrades in arms!  The pros (McCann supporters) were alternately known as the 'Selecteds' - that's because we caught them out trying to set up a private forum that excluded the rest of us!  How dare they!  The whole Europe and YGL sagas went on for at least 5 years!  We did however have truces during the holidays when we would try not to be obnoxious, happily they never lasted. 

But I have digressed.  Back in 2007, thousands of the antis were as angry and sickened by the McCanns actions as many are where crimes against children are involved.  It was not only necessary, it was imperative that the McCanns and the 'group' were protected.  As human beings we have to understand that. Because what can happen, and what did happen, was the story was taken up by a wild eyed extremist who wants the return of hanging and flogging to our town squares. 

All those angered and appalled at the blatant injustice in this case have been drawn in and manipulated by people who claim they want justice, but in reality, are only seeking fame and infamy for themselves.  They want to be the one who 'cracks' the case.  Bennett thought he could tag onto the golden egg that was Madeleine's name by setting up the Madeleine Foundation.  He wanted a slice of those 50billion hits the McCann website were getting.

This case has also attracted those who are interested in the cases of historic sexual abuse.  I too had a link because of my memoir Cry and You Cry Alone, I lived in a children's home run by two psychopaths, an ex Jesuit monk who practiced Opus Dei for everyone, the boys especially, and sexually frustrated nun who had the hots for him.  My abuse wasn't sexual, it was the batterings I took for not kowtowing to their freaky rules.  

I've never given any credence to the whole 'paedophile ring' theory in this case. These people were going out of their way to get other people to look after their kids, including trained nannies.  Abusers keep the kids hidden away, they don't risk them having conversations with 'outsiders' and they don't organise sporty holidays where the kids are rarely in their company! What most parents of young children need, more than anything else, is a break from the kids!  Again, don't excited Textusa, I'm talking about the mental stimulation of adult company. That doesn't make them bad people or even bad parents.  As a young mum, I never wanted to miss the craic, my motto was happy mum = happy child.  

So why did the public hate the 'antis'?  I try to imagine how I would feel if a forum or a group of concerned citizens attacked, Kerry Needham, for example.  I would probably be very angry with the attackers, the words shame on you, comes to mind.  So now I must apply that train of thought to those who truly believe the McCanns are innocent.  Their belief may be based on the biased headlines of the MSM and successful marketing campaign of Team McCann, but if they don't want to listen to alternate opinion, they won't.  Some people have very closed minds, it's gutting, but something we have to accept or go crazy.      
Where several infamous antis have gone way off track is by their deluding themselves that their hmmm, 'research' has solved this case where two police forces have failed. I have no doubt Bennett already has his Nobel Prize acceptance speech at the ready.  Much as I hate pointing out again and againTony Bennett is as mad as a box of frogs, too much of his nonsense is still around misleading those who are searching for the truth.  Richard D. Hall was his biggest, and most gullible, mark. 

But the purpose of this blog was to pick up on a point made by John Blacksmith in the previous comments.  These 'researchers' (pretentious twats) have invaded the lives of the innocent citizens who gave statements to the Portuguese police.  They believe calling their stalking and harassment of witnesses in a criminal investigation 'research' somehow validates their vile and immoral behaviour.  It doesn't.  Nowadays, we can all pretty much stalk whoever we want, but we don't.  Why?  Because the majority of us have a moral compass and the empathy to understand how our actions will affect others. 

Unfortunately, whilst there were thousands and thousands questioning the justice in this case, we were all judged by the antics of the malicious and despicable Tony Bennett. First with his spurious private legal against the parents, then with his distasteful publicity seeking antics handing out leaflets in their home town.  We were all tarred with the same brush and despised from then on.

Bennett boasts that CMoMM is the best McCann forum on the www.  But it isn't, it is the most grotesque.  Now that every intelligent poster has been banned or kicked out, all that remains are the lobotomised diehards.  Their legacy will be in there with Stop the Myths and JATKY2, bloodsucking ghouls looking for victims. 

I found it quite poignant when JB asked 'what can the nannies do'?  Indeed.  As witnesses in an ongoing investigation, they cannot say anything.  My heart goes out to them, as it does to all those targeted by CMoMM.  I have nothing but respect for them and in fact all of those put through hell by the conspiraloons. Their quiet dignity has not gone unnoticed. 

It may be when this is all over that those libelled by Bennett and CMoMM will have recourse to justice of some kind and who could blame them.  However, they seem to have the good sense to know their best course of action is to avoid these vipers like the plague.  Even the two words, fuck off, would send them into a feeding frenzy. 

I honest to God do not know what Operation Grange are up to.  I don't quite buy into the 'they are all involved in the cover up' theory.  I still have enough faith left in human nature, and indeed the police, to believe that the victim, Madeleine is still the focus of their investigation. 

Tuesday 11 October 2016


[In response to comment on previous blog]

Many thanks 22:07, I don't bother very much with CMoMM these days, whilst it makes a good study of psychopathy, it's stuck in an endless cycle of rehash and there is rarely anything of interest.

I had a look at that thread and the letter sent by 'Jill' (Bennett) - obviously everything signed off by him goes straight in the shredder, lol. OMG, my sympathy lies with the recipient, imagine having to read that pile of old bunkum? I'd rather have my toenails extracted one by one, or go waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay!

Who the fffff... do they think they are? Its like a crowd of drunks having an extended game of Cluedo then presenting themselves at the local police station, saying we've solved it!  It was the butler in the pantry with the dagger, hic.  The lack of signatures to their petitions shows they are not representative of the public. And what is it they want?  I'm afraid this is where we get into pitchfork territory.  Given the hostile and aggressive manner of the CMoMM forum, it is clear that several of them are taking this matter far too personally. 

Because this case involves a small child, it is emotive and attracted extremists and vigilantes.  Some people feel so passionately about child protection that reason and logic flies out the window.  We are programmed to protect our young, it is not a bad thing, but some unscrupulous people will go out of their way to harvest that anger and need for retribution.  That is, they will use it to stir up an angry mob.  In the case of Madeleine, that manipulation of public opinion is prevalent in both camps.   

There comes a point where we all have to ask ourselves why we are still here?  As a manic depressive with OCD, my own 'addiction' was a way in which to blot out the real world.  My need to solve the puzzle that was Madeleine's disappearance, was as strong as my need to get to the final page of an Agatha Christie novel.  I have to say I reached the 'beyond reasonable doubt' stage many moons ago, but like everyone else, that final 'how they did it' part remains elusive.  

I think like many of the antis, that there is something integrally wrong in our society when a little girl can go missing without explanation.  We are civilised people who defend the vulnerable from the wicked, it makes us human.  Had the McCanns been honest at the beginning, the world would have been gentle with them.  Accidents and even crimes of passion, happen - the McCanns claim Kate was offered a 'serve 2 years' deal, a compassionate option if true.

However, it is all the crimes committed since that irk the most.  The way in which they paraded themselves as victims and used the loss of their daughter to amass a large personal fortune.  None of the public's very generous donations have been used to assist anyone outside of the 'family', in fact, it would seem, the bulk of the fund has been used to protect the reputation of the parents.  And worse, much has been used to destroy the name, reputation, family and life of the detective who was simply doing his job, looking for Madeleine.  They continue with their sheer bloody minded agenda to destroy Goncalo Amaral, as it appears they have now lodged another Appeal. 

For myself, and I'm sure with many others, this case has opened our eyes to a  whole new world.  Six months into reading everything I could find on this case, I began to see what a phoney society we are living in.  It was a revelation moment.  Not too dissimilar to when I entered higher education in my late 30's and discovered religion was bollox, movies send out hidden messages and our society is ruled by newspaper barons.  Who knew? 

Despite all of that, I still believed that we had the greatest justice system in the world, the best police and the least corrupt politicians (60's indoctrination education) and a basically free press.  Can't believe I was once that na├»ve. This case has demonstrated how easy it is for the establishment, or indeed anyone with a proactive family, to manipulate public opinion using the MSM. 

Unfortunately, for them, the internet has done away with borders and for all the UK tabloids publishing McCann propaganda, the real story from Portugal was getting through and spreading like wildfire.  Ergo, for the last ten years we have been watching McCann and McCann .v. WorldWideWeb.  I mean ffs, who employs lawyers to watch social media 24/7?  How come two doctors don't have any friends or colleagues with the guts to use the words 'paranoia' and 'bottomless pit'? 

Those who ask why we are still here, don't seem to understand that what has been seen cannot be unseen.  We have watched in astonishment as undeserving people have been elevated and enriched by this tragedy.  The parents especially who are still demanding £400k from the former detective and public recognition for their supposed good works.  These parents have been fundraising since the moment their daughter disappeared.  Whilst the locals and holidaymakers physically searched for their missing child, they were plotting on how to make Maddie's face go viral.  'Did you go out there and physically search?' 'well we wanted to, but we were really busy' says Kate.  Wtf takes priority over searching for your missing child, grrrrr. 

But I try to avoid getting personal, gawd knows, the McCanns and their wider family have enough to worry about, but hearing that they are continuing with their libel actions against Goncalo Amaral, sticks in my craw. I cannot understand how those police officers working on Operation Grange can stay silent whilst another detective, just like them, is being persecuted by this manipulative couple.   I do of course appreciate the police have a duty to protect everyone, including the McCanns, it's their failure to stop and prevent crime.  The Fund continues, gullible people are still being fleeced (every penny will go on the search) and the financial claims against Goncalo Amaral are immoral, if not illegal.  Not to mention of course, the ruthless way in which they demanded that an example be made of an innocent member of the public and the deed was done. That should scare all of us.

Anyhow, returning the multi paged diatribe of Jill Havern (Tone the Bore), I seriously hope the government department tasked with reading the tripe (poor sods) have a loons and nutters post bin marked 'read later - if ever'.  With Tony Bennett a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.  He has managed to hone his targets down to civil servants who are, by the law of this land, obliged to read his lengthy epistles.  We can only hope the suicide rate among that particular demographic doesn't rise dramatically.  If I were them, I'd choose head in the gas oven every time. 

The only one who doesn't realise Bennett is talking complete twaddle is Bennett and maybe Richard Hall and a small assortment of (harmless, we hope), right wing psychopaths and loons.  Given the volume of correspondence from Tone the Bore, I would imagine the recipients give them little regard.  I noticed on that thread, that another poster had received a more detailed reply than 'Jill', which I found a tad amusing. 

Bennett is drawn to this case because he believes some sort of deviant sex is involved.  In his loony creationist head, he believes he is surrounded by sinners enjoying a lot more carnal knowledge than himself.  He is fire and brimstone, a preacher without a pulpit or an audience.  He deprives himself of television and popular culture, and he wants it banned for everyone else.  

Who can calculate the amount of damage he has done to the official search for Madeleine.  I have no doubt his antics alone built the wall around this case. The constant bragging that he has a huge audience of angry justice seekers is effectively a nasty threat.  The authorities have no option but to increase the McCanns' protection.  The McCanns have struggled to provide evidence that they have been targeted or threatened as a result of the Goncalo Amaral's book, all they had was Bennett's Madeleine's Foundation.

The truth is, the majority of people who do not believe the McCanns have not made retribution against the McCanns, their life's work.  That would be creepy.  They want to see justice for Madeleine, by they want to see it via the democratically agreed justice procedures.  Many, myself included, have a real distaste for vigilantism, it seems to attract all the wrong kind of people. 


Thursday 6 October 2016


[in reply to a comment on the previous blog]

Thanks for reminding us of the Summers and Swan 'McCanns are innocent get it' book, with its chapter dedicated to the scourge of the 21st century, internet trolls.  Doubt Summers and Swan will be too happy to be reminded of their sell out, it was hardly their finest hour.

The whole purpose of the S&S book seemed to be to stir up public hatred against the critics of Kate and Gerry McCann. They officially introduced the word 'hater' to the English lexicon, to describe anyone who refused to be taken in by the obvious faked abduction and subsequent cover up.

The S&S book was in fact laying the groundwork to purge the internet of McCann critics, it was hoped through the eloquence of their words, S&S would sway public opinion back to the way it was in 2007. Not only to revive the unprecedented generosity to the K&G Fund, but also to incite anger and hatred towards anyone 'trolling' the officially cleared parents online. I use the word 'trolling' very loosely here, because it is one of those 'catch all' words that will be used constantly by those who want to police the internet. And of course Gerry and Kate claim not to use social media, ergo, strictly speaking, they cannot be trolled.

The campaign to keep Madeleine (or themselves) in the public eye, was made up of several components, the most vigorous faction, headed by a megalomaniac who believed he had the power to control the internet and the news, and who demands that any criticism of himself and his good wife should lead to instant arrest.  The sane among us would have told him to get a grip and maybe have a lie down with a mind improving book.  Those on £300 per hour however, tell him it's perfectly feasible, and would he like to pay by instalments. 

The launch of the Summers and Swan book was timed to coincide with Jim Gamble's clamp down on the internet trolls who keep reminding the world that Madeleine wasn't abducted.  In Martin Brunt's feature, Mr. Gamble, in his strict, authoritarian Policeman mode, told all the critics of Kate and Gerry, we are coming to get you.  Unfortunately, S&S failed to turn public opinion around, their definitive book on the Madeleine disappearance was met with scorn and derision, each and every one of their 'parents are innocent' assertions swiftly deconstructed and ridiculed by real experts, in their Amazon reviews.

The McCanns however seem to have a thing for runaway trains, so part II, Sky News went ahead anyway with Mr. Newsman himself, Martin Brunt exposing the evil behind those members of the public posing as ordinary people.  Mr. Gamble could not hide his sheer glee as he congratulated Martin on twitter for exposing public enemy number 1, a quiet, unassuming, middle aged lady in a pretty Leicestershire village.  Unfortunately, no-one was saying, thanks Jim, thanks Martin, we can all now sleep safely in our beds, they were horrified that Sky News even considered this non story as being of public interest, and appalled at the cruelty behind it. 

Summers and Swan may be that rarity, well heeled writers, but that one book has now made their entire body of work unreadable. For me at least, I am an absolute stickler for the truth, if an author distorts even one aspect of the facts in order to fit their own conclusions, I stop reading.  My reading list is so extensive I have to be discerning and nothing irks quite so much as having my time wasted. I was once having what I thought was a sensible telephone conversation with a McCann 'anti' when 45 minutes in, she told me Madeleine was a clone.  It was one of those 'doh' moments, and 45 minutes I will never get back.  I'm afraid I view the S&S Madeleine book in the same way. 

I have to say there is a certain amount of pleasure watching the McCann spin team tie themselves up in knots, but the plan to wipe out the McCann sceptics online was cold, calculated and cruel.  Despite the fact that S&S were unable to stir up an angry mob, Sky News went ahead anyway. It chills me to the bone that not one of them were compassionate enough to consider that what they were doing could have such a tragic outcome.  And let's not be in any doubt here, Brenda Leyland was to be the first of many, the death dossier contained dozens of names, in my own case they had over 100 pages on me.  The death dossier, or as it used to be known, the blacklist, was publically available for years, an additional CV if you like for any employer checking out candidates on social media.  The McCann supporters have always used threats of exposure to silence online critics. 

Have to say, I was a little disappointed not to have been included in the 'troll' section of the S&S book, especially as their researchers had provided so much information.  It could be because I am a survivor of the Catholic care system, bipolar and known for past alcohol and substance abuse and a smidgeon of promiscuity.  I was a bit of a party girl, what can I say? hic.  Of course the dossier compilers have used all of the aforementioned to pillory me for years, in their Amish heads, anyone who lives outside of the designated Christian man, woman 2.4 children combo, is quite clearly a lunatic.  Unhappily for them, I wear my lunacy with pride, not only do I not regret my wild past, I wish I had done a bit more. 

It may be that my CSA survivor status spared me a public door stepping by Martin Brunt, but I think it is more likely to have been my big gob. I'm what my friends and family euphemistically describe as 'a loose cannon'.  My sons have actually compiled a list of things I can and cannot do and say when out with them in public!  I cannot be too critical of them because I remember compiling a similar list for my own mother, and just like her, I'm having great fun doing the opposite ;)  I'm too honest for my own good, my dad used to tell me, and he was right, it's been positively detrimental, among my funeral songs, I have 'Whyyyyyyy can't I keep my big mouth shut', from the batterings I took in the convent, to the batterings I take online, my honesty always manages to offend someone.  I will have to include in that offended group, several past bosses.  It seems the question, 'aren't you getting paid £200 an hour to do this?' takes you straight past Go,  and out the revolving doors.   

But let's get back to the next part of the spin doctors cunning plan.  It was hoped through the S&S book, the public at large would once again feel overwhelming sympathy for eternal victims Kate and Gerry, and their outrage would be captured in a call for a clampdown on internet trolls.  However, apart from the shrill mean spirited comments of Carol Malone, the best they managed to stir up was 'who gives a feck'. Kate and Gerry have hogged the front pages for years, how much more do they want ffs?  The love the public felt for Kate and Gerry in the summer of 2007, is now worse than hate, it is indifference.

Ten years on the publically funded investigation into Madeleine's disappearance continues.  Whilst it is true that the McCann family and indeed all of those involved must, as far as humanely possible, be protected from a media storm on the scale of that which took hold when the story broke.  No matter what we on the internet know, or have discovered, we are not the Law.  Quite rightly, everyone is innocent until proved guilty, and everyone deserves a fair trial.

However, it is wrong on every level to sweep those wicked crimes under the carpet.  Especially a crime that reached the scale of this one.  All the great and good who rushed to Mr and Mrs McCanns assistance must somehow squirm out of their past gushing enthusiasm.  For myself, I no longer believe a word Donal MacIntyre or Mark Williams Thomas says, crime experts, pah! Dr. Sharon Leal, how far back have you taken the science of lie detection?  It's the assumption that we the audience are idiots that I find most offensive. 

If Operation Grange remains live to preserve the myth that this was a stranger abduction, then questions must be asked of those signing the cheques.  Aren't there current, solveable, cases they could be working on?  Why are they wasting resources and manpower on a dead duck?  It is not the job of Scotland Yard detectives to preserve the dignity of politicians and ex police chiefs, their job, first and foremost, is to uncover the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance and bring those responsible to justice.
As for Gerry and Kate, they are already living in a prison of their own making, so too all those closely involved in that fateful holiday.  That kind of hell must be akin to Edgar Allen Poe's Tell Tale Heart, something we wouldn't wish on our worst enemies.  In a strange way, I actually feel sympathy for them, they can never go back to being the care free thirtysomething doctors they once were.  In choosing the path of deception, they sealed their fate.  They have plastered their own faces all over the globe, and not in a good 'A' lister film star way, but in a way that castes suspicion over themselves for ever more. 

However, before I start getting maudlin about the infamous pair, I have to remind myself that they have maliciously and vindictively set out to inflict misery and fear on anyone who crosses them.  Their happy clappy, Christian charity fund raising persona is just as phoney as that of Jimmy Savile and Lance Armstrong.  And for a while there, they had a good thing going.  The Fund was growing into a large corporation, and Gerry was styling himself the UK John Walsh. With the Mr and Mrs as the faces of Missing Children, they were looking at a multi million industry charity with Madeleine becoming the face of Christmas (and all major holidays) with badges and t-shirts available. 

In not bringing any charges, or disclosing the results of their investigation, Operation Grange are effectively allowing the cover up to continue.  That is the raising of funds and the persecution of their Portuguese colleague, Goncalo Amaral.  This fine mess cannot continue ad infinitum.  There are other crimes that need solving and other children that need finding. 

Tuesday 4 October 2016


Two years ago this week, Gerry McCann, the father of a missing child, demanded that an example be made of the internet 'trolls' he claimed were hounding and threatening his family online.  The McCann family or a 'group of concerned citizens' had compiled a dossier of 'offenders' and ex head of CEOP Jim Gamble and Sky's Martin Brunt took it from there. This was Jim Gamble's cleansing of social media at it's finest and a taster of his own particular form of justice.

The victim they selected, Brenda Leyland, hadn't in fact committed any crime, she, like myself and thousands of others simply refused to accept the establishment line that Madeleine McCann was abducted by a stranger.  The McCanns and those who assist them, truly believed they could stamp out all their critics with a gang of thugs patrolling the internet and via hard cash in the libel courts. To be fair, for a while there they succeeded. 

Unfortunately for Gerry McCann, Jim Gamble and Martin Brunt, their jackboot, vigilante tactics appalled the public, whatever Brenda had done, she did not deserve a public execution.  They selected Brenda because she was 'ordinary', but it was that ordinariness that made her everyone's mum, nan and aunty - the McCann couple, already seen as cold, were now chilling.

It is bizarre that two years on, Operation Grange seem as far from a conclusion as they were at the outset but probably not surprising.  The grisly details of what happened the night Madeleine disappeared have become the back story, it's what happened from that night onwards, that will make the Chilcott report look like a couple of hours of light reading. 

The incumbent Blair government perverted the course of justice.  There is no nice, or euphemistic way of putting it.  It was obvious to the first two Portuguese policemen on the scene that the abduction was staged, and ten years on, to anyone who looks at the facts without the 'but they are such a nice couple' blinkers, it still is.  The problem Operation Grange have, is that once they point the finger at Gerry and Kate, the entire house of cards will collapse.

What was said during Gerry's one to one chats with PMs Blair and Brown?  Or indeed between Kate and Cherie?  One thing we can be sure of, every word will be kept verbatim.  Are we to believe that two British Prime Ministers, with all the country's top advisors, police and Special Branch, were taken in by Gerry and Kate?  Not only were they taken in, they put the full services of the establishment at Team McCann's disposal.  That's an Oops right up there with Okily Dokily Mr. Bush.  

How many New Labour cabinet ministers were schmoozing the McCanns?  Or police chiefs attending their fund raising events?  Will the highly experienced and decorated Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe and Jim Gamble explain how they were so misled by a couple of tricksters the average housewife could spot within seconds?  The unveiling of a fake abduction would reveal a sea of red faces and a scramble by those who should have known better to find excuses for supporting such an obvious scam. 

I kind of get the predicament Operation Grange finds themselves in and the difficulties they must have in releasing public statements.  At some point they will have to pee in the pot or get off it.  It has been clear for some time that OG are not looking for an abductor, which translates, 'we know who's responsible but we don't have enough to prosecute'.  Gerry's 'Nooooo evidence' mantra seems to be holding up quite well, but you can't keep throwing public money at an investigation that's going nowhere. 

Unfortunately, while the silence of Operation Grange might temporarily hold back the floodgates, (who dare publish while Gerry and Kate have so much on so much power over so many - including Amazon?), the walls of the dam could give at any time, and the entire team could look like procrastinating fools. You can imagine the water cooler chat, 'Seriously! Scotland Yard's finest didn't know?', following The Sun's serialisation of Kate's latest memoir 'Gotcha You Mugs!'. 

Those of us who know more about this case than is healthy, would argue the 'No Evidence' point quite vigorously, a quick google of Madeleine McCann, will not only throw up every rational argument for why the parents were involved, it will do it in alphabetical order and with pictures. 

Whatever is going on behind the scenes in an effort to limit the damage when Madeleine hits the headlines again, should not be used to take out members of the public.  And vigilant groups, even if they are 'establishment' ones, should not have the power to destroy lives. 

If I were Brenda's family, I would still be mad as hell, but I respect their right to privacy.  I think unless you understand the full horrors of the abuse of power in Madeleine's name, we 'McCann geeks' will always seem a little strange. My own adult sons think I am quite bonkers.  When justice finally arrives for Madeleine, Goncalo and all those 'destroyed' by the McCanns and their henchmen, I want to see Brenda's name cleared, public apologies for those vile troll headlines that drove the poor woman to her death.  The use of the word 'troll' has sinister undertones and it will be used unscrupulously by those intent on policing the internet and targeting dissenters.  In the case of Brenda it was used as a warning to others that spectacularly backfired. 

I think on this sad anniversary, it is important to remember the ghastly way in the full might of the establishment and the media were used to destroy the life of an ordinary woman who dared to question an obvious lie. 

RIP Brenda Leyland


originally posted 5th October 2014

So Sky's rolling news day on McCann trolls has resulted in the death of Brenda Leyland (Sweepyface) a middle aged lady angered by the lies of Gerry and Kate McCann. Seven years on, despite being suspects in the eyes of the rest of the world, in the UK they are still being treated like victims and being compensated financially.  No amount of money will satisfy Gerry and Kate, they have had over £4m, they also want the Laws to be changed so their crimes will never be reported.  We have had a news blackout in the UK for the past 7 years.  Why?

The McCanns didn't have any threats against them or their children.  Their witness claimed this in the Lisbon libel trial, but could not substantiate it.  Several months on, no-one has been arrested or charged for threatening the McCanns.  A bit like the abductor.

The biggest threat they could find to the McCanns was poor old Brenda, an obviously shy, timid lady who clearly presented no danger to the McCanns whatsoever.  But she was to be the scapegoat, the face of the cruel campaign against an innocent family.  She was the line of least resistance - had they doorstepped any of the more outspoken among us, we would have given them an interview they couldn't broadcast, on the hour, every hour, etc without Carter Ruck jumping down their throats - now re-employed by McCanns it seems and kerchinging nicely. 

Did Martin Brunt threaten her? If so, what with?  He had pretty much done the worst thing imaginable, but it clearly left her in great fear.  She fled from her village.  More doorstepping perhaps?  Her past raked up?  Did she have mental health issues?  Did any of her family?  Was she a vulnerable adult in any way? Surely Sky News would not have carried out such a catastrophic public attack without making a few basic checks? 

Were the McCanns going to go after her financially, as they have done with Goncalo Amaral, demand that she sell her house?  Was she facing threats of financial ruin? How could a regular person stand up to Carter Ruck? Her limited 'I thought I was entitled to' - portrayed her as ignorant, but what else did she say when she took the crew inside her house?

What did the police say to her?  Afaik, she was not arrested or cautioned, but did they give her a 'stern' taking to? And how stern was that talk?  Normal people with no criminal record or dealings with the police would be terrified. What Laws did Brenda break, if any?  Lets hope the police taped their interviews with her, if I were her family, I would demand they be revealed at the Inquest - and there should definitely be an Inquest.

However, Jim Gamble's hope of using 'outing' as a device to stop people asking questions about the McCanns, or indeed anything, has spectacularly backfired.  The consequences of such sinister threats have become all too apparent.  I would imagine legal talks are frantically underway as we speak, Sky News cannot just brush this off, they must at the very least, issue an apology to Brenda's family.  No Court in the world (maybe N.Korea or UK under McCann Rule) would have found Brenda guilty of anything.  If worse tweeters exist, then why didn't Sky go after them, why go after a fragile, quiet lady in a pretty village, who clearly posed no threat to the McCanns whatsoever.  The cynic in me pictures the McCanns looking up the property prices as one reason, but more likely the subliminal message was 'it could be you'.  There were threatening undertones in that news report, and more than a tinge of cruelty in the way the story was reported.  They couldn't hide their glee at exposing a respectable middle aged lady as a vicious internet troll to all her friends, family and neighbours. It was pitchforking at its very worst.

However, any gleeful thoughts Gamble and McCanns may have of outing people on a regular basis must now be treated with the seriousness it deserves, as Brenda's tragic death has proved.  The punishment Brenda received (based on no evidence) was way beyond anything a Court could have dished out.  It seemed more like payback, than a genuine news story,  Her face, and home, was broadcast every hour, on the hour, as she was publically labelled as a 'Hater', continually hounding the family of Madeleine McCann.  She wasn't.  She was angry at this blatant miscarriage of justice as many are.  Nothing she did deserved the kind of punishment she received.  The death of a child is always emotive, especially when those charged to uphold the law appear to be covering it up. Sky News acted as Judge, Jury and Executioner.  Brenda is dead because of what she was accused of, not because of what she did.  She probably said a lot more in that Sky interview than 'I thought I was entitled to', but will we ever know?  They wanted to label her as evil, and they did.
Brenda, bless her, knowingly or unknowingly, may well set off a chain of events that will bring about the final downfall of the McCanns and their minions.   Jim Gamble and the McCanns wanted to use her as an example of what will happen to anyone criticising them, but her suicide has turned the tables.  Now they have to justify what they have done to her. 

Monday 3 October 2016


Unfortunately immigration is usually discussed from a negative perspective, because it's a political hot potato.  Especially if an unscrupulous government want a scapegoat for their own failures and a common enemy to unite a disgruntled population.  Divide and rule, as long as those in need are fighting each other, those responsible for managing and administering the economy have free rein to do as they wish. 

Obviously, an influx of new people into any community will be a drain on services that were designed to cope with several million less.  This isn't the fault of the immigrants or the ageing population, the fault lies in the failure of successive governments to invest in line with the changing demographic. If the UK were a commercial business it would not cut back as demand grew, it would expand in line with it's customers needs.  It would be like Ronald McDonald saying too many people are eating burgers, so lets shut down loads of branches, cut back on staff and make the service so shit, it will drive all the customers away.   

As for there being a surge in the population.  I'm not convinced there has been, and if there has, what does it matter anyway?  People come and go as they always have and as nice as our neighbours might be, we cannot hang onto them forever.  They might move, or we might, the whole neighbour thing is pretty much the luck of the draw and there is nothing we can do about it.  And even if we could, do we really want to be the kind of people who fear outsiders and strangers? 

Since time began, man has had the urge to travel, and these days it's a lot easier, for everyone.  No society or community is static, people no longer spend their entire lives in one small town.  Kids grow up and move on, sometimes to the other side of the world, older people are upping sticks and buying a place in the sun.  Without immigrants, I am not really sure how communities could continue to run efficiently when the younger generations move on.  What exactly are the anti immigration lobby aiming for?  Do they simply want to shut Britain's doors because the country's full up and we're all doing nicely ta very much.  Are they trying to draw a line under evolution, stop the world, so we an all disembark in the England of Dad's Army?

How can the UK possibly have a fixed number for the amount of immigrants entering the UK?  And how can a number be reasonably fixed at a time of humanitarian crisis?  The number of people coming into (and going out of) the UK will vary from year to year.  As compassionate human beings we have to respond to the circumstances that exist at any given time and there should be no question that we give refuge to those in need. 

As a child of immigrant parents, my dad was Scottish, my mum Irish, it was only as I got older that I began to appreciate just how brave and go getting they were.  And I feel much the same with regard to all immigrants, they are a constant reminder that this is a land of opportunity.  My own home town, devastated by the effects of austerity, continues to tick over mostly because of all those immigrants who have taken a chance on starting up new businesses have the drive, ambition and belief that seems to have been lost among the indigenous population.  They haven't come to the UK, because they want to sponge off the Welfare State, they have come here because GB still has the reputation of being one of the most advanced civilised nations on the globe. We were once pioneers, and those who join us believe we still can be.

Migrant workers are a good thing, they have existed since the beginning of time.  Some might say it is in our genes to follow the work and during times of growth outside help is essential, see Egypt circa 1200bc or the influx of Irish into the UK in the 1960's.  There is a good argument to be made that economic migrants lower wages by working for less, but the lowering of the wages lies solely with the employers.  Since the Tories and Tony Blair indoctrinated everyone with the idea that bosses are nice people and we don't need Unions anymore, they can pretty much treat their employees as they choose, and they choose to get as much work for the least amount of pay as they can.  When they sing about those Satanic mills, it is with fond memories. 

Those who want to restrict freedom of movement, send shivers down my spine. The first thing that comes to mind is the Berlin Wall and, god forbid, Donald Trump's Mexican Wall.  Where does it begin, and [shudders] where does it end? If we limit the number of new citizens coming into the UK, will other countries reciprocate and turn our kids away?  Should UK citizens have priority in the job market, even if they are not necessarily the best person for the job?  

But let's turn to the most common arguments against immigration?

I've got nowhere to live
My child can't get a place in the local school
I had to wait 10 hours in A&E

The answer to all of the above: lack of investment in vital public services by successive governments, this one especially.  Somehow they have managed to win two elections pitching austerity is good and let's hear it for the wealth creators.  (same pitch as Liz Kendall and plotters).  Investing in people and communities is just plain crazy, yeh? or, it can only be done when their pals, the wealth creators feel benevolent enough to pay some taxes.  No obligation of course, only if they feel like it. 

Let's smash this 'Austerity is Right' argument back on it's heels.  It is not right, it is pointless, and worse, it is cruel and inhumane.  To put it into perspective.  at a time when this country was virtually on its knees, and the last time we had food banks, was just after the second World War.  Yet, out of the devastation, the Clement Attlee government built the Welfare State and the NHS.  In the 21st century and as the 6th richest nation in the world, the above 3 complaints should shame every right wing politician especially those Labour politicians who continue to believe that austerity is right. 

It is not the fault of immigrants, or the sick and disabled, it is the failure of government and local authorities to provide the facilities needed for a growing population.  A 'New Deal' funds itself.  New homes, schools and hospitals create new jobs, which creates spending power, which boosts new business. If a system is collapsing because too many people are making demands on it, the answer isn't to cut down on the people, it is to expand and improve the system!  

I love our multicultural society because I have always taken great pleasure in meeting people from far off lands, for me, it is the next best thing to visiting the place myself.  As a small child in the early 1960's I was fortunate to grow up in a community where all my playmates came from a huge variety of ethnic backgrounds.  We were all children of immigrants who worked in the huge hospital opposite our row of houses. From those who worked in the kitchens, to the doctors and nurses, there were no class barriers either.  My best pals were a little Indian girl called Konni and a little German boy called Heina - I learned at a very early age that if I wanted to make friends with someone 'wanna make some mud pies' was pretty universal. 

My own experience of a mixed, inter racial childhood was a positive one, and one that I can say has enriched my life.  I've never had that fear of foreigners that I saw in others as I got older.  Those parents who worry that their children's education will suffer because of any influx of immigrant children into local schools, should set their fears aside.  Firstly, the parents of these immigrant children are made of pretty stern stuff.  Some have crossed oceans to get here.  They know and understand the benefit of a good education and they will actively push their children towards high achievement.  Which makes them pretty good friends for our wayward kids to pal up with. 

Secondly, they offer our kids a window into a whole new world that neither parents or teachers could ever hope to achieve.  Small children don't have prejudices, all the little people around them are their friends and always will be.  And if they are fortunate to grow up untainted by the world around them, they will be pacifists.  They will understand and respect other cultures and traditions rather than fear them.  Children who grow up in a multicultural environment will not go into any negotiations from a nationalistic stance.  There is hope for the future.    

Immigrants are not a threat to our society, they are a lifeline.  They are working their socks off to build a better life for themselves and their children.  They want what we want, and they are, arguably, more determined to get it.  They still see the potential GB has, the kudos of a British education and a NHS background. Even in the toughest times, they have optimism and vision, where we old cynics see a landscape of despair, they see opportunity and hope. 

The housing crisis, the lack of good school places and the appalling staff and bed shortages in our hospitals, predate the current refugee crisis.  They are the result of trying to run public services on a shoestring.  Those with charge of the public purse have not used our taxes and national insurance to maintain and upkeep the National Health service, they have cut vital services to the bone and spent the money elsewhere.  Limiting the number of people who come into the UK will make no difference to the lives of UK citizens.  As long as those who manage the economy squeeze vital services to breaking point, there will always be shortages and it is the general public (including the immigrants) who will suffer.  None of us are getting the services we pay for. 

The majority of people with immigration fears are not racist, they have been placed in a position where it feels as though they are competing with their neighbours for homes, jobs and school places, because lack of investment means there is not enough to go round.  Sadly, using an ethnic minority to carry all the blame for society's ills, is a political tool that goes back to the beginning of time.  It was cheap and devious in biblical days, and it is cheap and devious now.

Our neighbours are not our enemies.  The problems we have lie solely with
mismanagement by those at the top.  Those communities hit hardest by the double dip recessions and austerity, have far greater problems than new people coming to their areas. They have been run down by decades of under investment and forward planning.  Sure Start gave them a glimmer of hope for a while, but the Tories swiftly put an end to that.   

As for these small groups of new people, we should welcome them into our midst.  I remember as an 11 year old asking my history teacher what England, or more specifically Englanders would have been like if it had never been invaded.  She then painted an image of blond haired, blue eyed 'angels' from Angeland that I actually found quite charming - even though I didn't fit the Aryan criteria myself.  I didn't understand the sinister connotations and I hadn't seen Children of the Damned, it was a Catholic girls school, what did I know.     

I think any kind of legislation to preserve a society in it's original form is a tad Amish.  Those fighting against immigration are actually fighting against change, they cannot accept that the world around them is doing as it always has done, it is evolving.  The whole idea of gates, walls and stricter border controls takes us back to medieval times.  In fact walls have got a terrible history altogether (who can think of a good one?), they are symbols of tyranny and restrictions on freedom of movement are the foundations on which they are built.  Society does not become a better place by forming elite groups and excluding people.

I try to make a point each day, of chatting to and giving warm smiles, to the newcomers I encounter.  I want them and their children to feel welcome and I want them to know that the far right extremists do not represent the majority of us.   In the words of Maya Angelou, people will forget what you said, and what you did, but they will never forget how you made them feel.