Tuesday 29 August 2017


UPDATE - 30.08.17

With just over a month to go until Operation Grange comes to an end, or requests further funds to carry on, Gerry and Kate via their always obliging friend Tracey Kandhola, have announced they will dip into Madeleine's Fund to hire more private detectives.  (What happened to Dave Edgar?).

It would be fair to assume the parents of Madeleine know more than the rest of us, and from their statement it would appear Scotland Yard can't find Madeleine, or they believe she is dead.  In any event, the eventual conclusions of Operation Grange, are at odds with the beliefs of the parents.   

According to Tracey, the McCanns have a healthy £700k+ in the Madeleine Fund, and the search will go on, they will never give up.  Now, there has been no mention of 'The Fund' for quite some time, and many, myself included, thought any cash the McCanns have remaining would have to go towards the massive legal bills they owe in Portugal.  But they had good lawyers, a clause probably exists to protect the 'Search'. 

As the countdown begins, sources are leaking everywhere.  Last week, a source told us Operation Grange will request more funds.  This week, a source tells us, 'nope, no requests for more funds', and another source tells us they [the police]are 'finishers'.  Kate once described herself and Gerry as finishers too, so we may be seeing the beginnings of an epic battle. 


In response to an interesting reply on 'Not Believing doesn't equal hate' and to make more room - the discussion continues here.  I wish I could have c/p it, and would be grateful if someone could :)

Whether you believe the parents were involved in Madeleine's disappearance or not, the biggest question is, 'why a cover up'?  Those directly involved in whatever happened to Madeleine, obviously had plenty of good reasons, so strictly speaking, the question should be 'why the cover up of the cover up'?

Which brings me to that interesting post at 22:43 on the previous blog.  It's a new angle - well for me at least. I never considered that Professor Gerry could have been working on something 'sensitive'.  And you may well be right, in that he had leverage in some way.  However, I think murder or death of a child trumps 'sensitive' information and in 10+ years there have been no groundbreaking discoveries involving Gerry that I am aware of.  I also think a research team could not operate with the sword of Damocles hanging over them.  But as always, I wouldn't rule anything out!

I am still very much of the opinion that whoever picked the phone up that night in Downing Street or Whitehall, made the wrong call. The full weight and backing of the incumbent government was thrown behind Gerry and Kate, before anyone had looked into what actually happened.  Neither Blair nor Brown had the balls to admit they got it wrong, instead they chose to carry on with the 'lie' and this is where all the schemers and manipulaters had them over a barrel.

At the time of Madeleine's disappearance, New Labour were getting a bit too big for their boots.  They were blocking ALL forms of protest by introducing 'terrorism laws' to arrest elderly gentlemen wearing subversive t-shirts outside their Labour party conferences or protesting outside parliament.  They were shamelessly exploiting the public's fear of terrorism, interspersed with fear of paedophiles, to find ways in which to control the internet.  They wanted access to all our internet activity, ID cards, everyone's DNA, and a few more rules to rough people up at borders. Who remembers tanks rolling into Heathrow Airport? That was quite a stunt.   

How many were involved in the cover up of the cover up?  Given the number of arseholes in New Labour who were happy to embark on an illegal war, covering up a colleague's mistake was a small ask.  When it became a big ask however, I think pressure was brought to bear.  Politicians are always susceptible to bribery and corruption, ask those with motorways where their parks used to be. Or, perhaps Tony (I wouldn't be seen dead in a Skoda) Blair.  It is one of the vulnerabilities or should we say, perks, of office.  To believe otherwise would be to go back to that pre Madeleine McCann age, when we believed the newspapers were supposed to tell the truth and our elected representatives were honourable. 

I suspect 'the hold' in this case is dark and murky, but not in the way the more deranged 'antis' would have us believe.  People on a quest to gather information about individuals, more often than not, have a malevolent agenda, they are looking for something they will, when necessary, use against their subject.  Years ago when homosexuality was illegal and 'gays' were demonised, homosexual MPs were especially vulnerable.  Now, any whiff of paedophilia, real or simply alleged, can destroy lives.  When Tony Blair left office, the God Complex had well and truly set in, I would imagine he had a portfolio on everyone useful, the entire population's he didn't quite achieve, but he was working on it. 

What began with a massive f**ku* for the incumbent government, soon became a popular cause, and it had all the ingredients to reinforce their 'Paedo on every corner' campaign.  Men rounded up by Operation Ore were still being publically executed.  The fabulous actor Chris Langham was imprisoned on charges that wouldn't have been out of place in medieval court, presided over by a row of a Cardinals.  My heart goes out to him, and to all those men whose lives were wrecked by that particularly nasty witch hunt.  And I can say that loud and proud, not just as a survivor of a catholic children's home, but as someone who can see straight through the hysteria and insanity and the Witchfinder General mentality. The charges against Chris Langham were akin to charging everyone who likes their horror graphic and violent for watching banned films, or arresting drug users, rather than their suppliers.  The dear man has never, and probably would never, hurt a child, the cruellest allegation anyone could have made against him, and it is obscene that he, and so many others, had to go through such an ordeal. 

But Chris Langham was among many, since then we have seen dozens of celebrities and politicians dragged into the public square, accused of decades old sex crimes.  This isn't law and order, it's showmanship, it's playing to the gallery.  There are no dawn raids Cliff Richard style, on Fred the plumber, who was known to have groped every bridesmaid at every wedding.  He can chuckle at the memory, safe in the knowledge his face will never appear on the front page of The Sun. 

Madeleine wasn't a bedraggled urchin that no-one cared about, she was the well loved, photogenic child, of pious and responsible doctors who were in no way to blame for her disappearance.   The subliminal messages sent out from the sweet, innocent, face of little Madeleine in those posters was loud and clear - it could be your child next. 

A double glazing salesman once told me, the answer to EVERY question is money.  Even after all these years I have yet to prove him wrong.  The financial exploitation of this poor child, is one of the distasteful sides of this case.  From all those who flew out to PDL, to the missing charities who made her their poster child, presumably while leaving pictures of the genuinely missing gathering dust.   

Going back to the political questions you raise, I think all of our eyes have been opened wide in recent years.  For me it all began with the Madeleine case.  I feel a bit embarrassed about that, because at the time I was teaching Media at A-level.  If I were in the same position today, the first assignment I would give my media and politics students, is watch Armando Iainnucci's 'The Thick of It'.  

Everything in this case, from the start to where we are now, is more accident than design - hence the spectacular mistakes.  Most of it, I think, has been 'off the cuff', at the beginning especially, when Jane Tanner's sighting had to be squeezed in between two checks on the kids written by the tapas group on Madeleine's colouring book.  Of course Jane's sighting should have topped that list, and they should all have been running in the direction she says he went, but for some reason, getting their alibis straight, had precedence. 

The initial cover up is pretty much set in stone.  The parents and their friends gave their statements, and they are sticking to them.  For Operation Grange, I suspect Cover Up II, is the biggest challenge.  All these delays and further extensions, suggest they have been stonewalled throughout.  They don't appear to have let that put them off, it would appear for Operation Grange, only the truth will do. 

Ps.  If anyone out there knows Chris Langham, could they please let him know that a genuine survivor of a regime run by real paedophiles, has spoken out on his behalf and give him my very kindest wishes.

Monday 28 August 2017


As a girl growing up in the 1960's, I struggled to find female role models that I could relate to.  Books and movies were filled with swashbuckling heroes and adventurers, and they were all men - the role of the female was to look pretty and nurture.  They weren't like me and I didn't want to be like them.  I was as tough as any boy, and definitely smarter, and I sure as hell wasn't going to be relegated to any minor role.  My first act of rebellion at the age of 4, was against my older brother (by 11 months), who ruled girls were allowed to make mud pies, but not actually throw them.  My act of rebellion hit him square in the eye.

But let's fast forward to the 21st century, where my despair at the lack of female role models has increased ten fold.  I don't necessarily mean those celebrity women who's lives depend on lipstick, make up and hair extensions, I think we should all play dressing up every day, it's a fun game that can make a seamless transition from childhood to the grown up world - women, and avante-garde men have known that for centuries. Just don't get carried away and wear a tiara to the office, unless of course, you are a 'queen', where anything goes.

Those are not the most corrosive or malevolent threats to women's equality, the Barbie doll hair and the startled eye brows are just another spin cycle - in a couple of centuries, we might all look like the majestically made up Cleopatra and her non gender specific predecessor King Tutankhamun.  A time, when both women and men, could slap on a bit of mascara and lippy and feel a whole lot better.  The malevolency comes from those who claim to speak on behalf of ALL women, while actually only speaking on behalf of themselves. 

In the UK we have the self appointed 'feminist' Jess Phillips, who seems to think behaving like a geezer bird will make her equal to her male colleagues.  She wants to be one of the lads, but she wants special treatment because she is a woman.  Admittedly, as a little girl in a boy's gang, that derogatory term I just used, could equally have applied to myself, but I grew out of it, it is very rarely now, that I want to punch a man in the eye.   I jest of course, I eventually got to like men, even, and maybe especially, those who treat me like a woman.  As every wise woman who has gone before, I have learned it is not necessary to become like a man to be his equal. 

Jess Phillips is flogging her self centred feminist view of the world.  Her right not be offended.  While her constituents were queuing at food banks, she was demanding a Panic Room and personal protection because trolls had demeaned her as a woman on Twitter.  She doesn't present herself as a politician, she presents herself as the bitch at school nobody liked getting her own back. The only thing missing from her twitter profile is the middle finger. She is oblivious to all those working class men, and yes, I said men, who fought, not only on the those hallowed benches she now occupies, but standing on orange boxes in town centres, visiting factories and speaking to the people, without shields and without protection, just as Jeremy Corbyn is doing now. 

There was a time Jess Phillips when there were no women in parliament, who do you think got them in?  And I'm not giving all the credit to men here, what of those women who stood up in public and demanded the right to vote?  Does she think the Pankhurst women were supping tea with those Lords and tory MPs who were having suffragettes imprisoned and tortured?  Does she think, fine dining with Jeremy Rees-Mogg, who votes for every cruel and draconian policy the tories introduce will endear her to Labour voters?  Did she spoil the ambience by telling him about her constituents who have their benefits stopped, or those being made homeless?  Or how about the sale of the NHS? From the beaming smiles, I'm guessing not.  Her intention was to illustrate how easily, she can 'walk with Kings'* without losing the common touch.  And of course to display her good manners, she somehow resisted the urge to flick peas at the place where his chin should be. 

But as shameful a feminist Jess Phillips is, the world's worst example of the current female hierarchy resides in the White House (occasionally), the ultimate trophy wife.  A woman prepared to look and dress like a mannequin on a daily basis, an inanimate Kim Cattrall on a pull along trolley would look more convincing as wife of the President.  For all those young girls writing fan mail to Melania, (or do kids just write to Ivanka who I shall get onto in a moment), is she really the kind of woman, young girls should aspire to?  I kind of see a parallel with Pretty Woman here - go to LA, become a hooker, marry Prince Charming.  I actually cringe at Melania's life choices, for her, the frog didn't change, he's still a frog, and an especially nasty one at that.  If he acts like a cruel and vindictive bastard on camera, what's he like in private?

But I have reserved most of my ire for Melania's fashion sense.  I think 'sense' like 'choices' should be in quotes, I don't believe she has either.  She dresses to please control freak Donald, who wears a beautiful woman on his arm like an accessory, a compliment to his own good taste.  She cannot have down days, pyjama days, or days where she just wants to fling off her bra and tie back her hair. For her dressing up is no longer a game, it's a daily chore, she looks as though all the fun has been sucked out of it.  What other 47 year old woman would go to a day of field sports with kids (Easter egg roll), in a pink prom dress and pink slippers?  What other married woman knows her marriage would be over is she gained 5 pounds?  Her's is not a happy life, and I hope mums out there with daughters never hesitate to point that out.  Her days are numbered, albeit that might be part of her own life plan, but for now, the only pleas for help she has, come from her cold, dead, eyes.

As for Ivanka, creepy as it sounds, she dresses for Daddy too, someone probably told The Donald, as an adolescent, that power dressing opened doors and it has become a Trump family norm.  Laying on the sofa in sweats, and eating popcorn is for looooozerrs,  I doubt slobbery has ever been an option.  The same could be said of the British aristocracy I suppose, but at least they dress appropriately for the occasion.  The stunningly beautiful Duchess of Cambridge, like Princess Di before her, dons jeans and sneakers and doesn't care if her hair gets wet or the plebs touch her.  I fear Ivanka and Melania would turn up for a hunt, in organza and killer heels. 

I haven't read Ivanka's book empowering women, and I really must, because I am going to rip it apart in mine, but I have read enough clips to groan, and on occasion, projectile vomit.  Firstly, Ivanka describes herself, as wife, mother, daughter, sister, everything but a woman in her own right.  Daddy doesn't describe himself as husband, father, grandfather etc, and I doubt any men in the political world do that either.  Maybe she thinks it's endearing, in a cute, girly kind of way, but it still kind of screams, hey sisters, find yourself a good husband.  

Digressing slightly, I recently discovered that singles now outnumber couples, in the USA at least.  That is, more people are discovering the joy of going through this life, unencumbered or obligated to another**.  OK, that's a pretty cynical old view, and one I didn't discover until I got my brain back (menopause).  It is actually possible to live a rich and rewarding life on your own.  Unfortunately, or fortunately, the fertile years are the most fun, and we wouldn't haven't had half the exploits we did, if common sense had had anything to do with it.  What of those single women Ivanka, those women outside of the conventional man, woman, 2.4 children norm?  Those female pioneers who dedicated their lives to improving the lives of others in the fields of medicine, science, art, literature, those who don't see themselves as a decorative feature on a man's arm. 

Ivanka Trump is not reaching ordinary women on any level.  She is reaching out to those women who are like her, or aspire to  be like her, and like her father she is deluded enough to believe there are many.  She believes women can have it all, the diamonds, the designer wardrobe, the yachts, the millionaire lifestyle, the symbols of her success. and her worth as a human being.  Ivanka won't be remembered for building schools and hospitals or providing humanitarian aid to victims of disaster, they will remember the advert for a new shoe line that she tweeted during Hurricane Harvey.  Her equally shallow dad, was recommending a book.  

I'm adding my bit towards the ire directed at Melania and Ivanka, because the USA have now demonstrated that literally ANYONE can become President.  There have been rumours that the fragrant Ivanka may one day run for Office herself, on the ticket that all little white girls in rich families should be treated as princesses and I fear one third of the US population might vote for it.  It should be pointed out, that as owner and distributer of (phoney) products made in third world sweat shops, the only ticket she should run on, is Greed.   

Karma for Jess Phillips I believe, will come from a genuine feminist, male or female, one who works to improve the lives of ALL women, not just precious female Labour MPs who got lucky.  Eventually her constituents will get fed up listening to her whining about trolls, and choose someone who doesn't want a fortress between them and their voters.

Karma for Melania looks as though it is already here, going by the constant pained expression on her face.  She grimaces at his touch, and who could blame him.  Even Henry VIII's fifth wife chose cavorting with the couriers over sleeping with the gouty, bad tempered old King, knowing death was a very real option. She may have been young and flighty, but she chose the axe.  I expect she is already making plans to get away from Donald, and unlike his former wife, I suspect it will be as far away as possible.  It wouldn't surprise me if she slipped a 'help note' to one of King Salman's wives, while Donald was partaking in the 'look at my big macho balls' dance. 

Karma for Ivanka, may well be creeping up on her.  She has everything money can buy, nothing is beyond her reach, or out of her greedy grasp.  But like Daddy, what she yearns for most of all, admiration, just ain't coming to her in the way she planned.  As First Daughter, she wanted to flaunt her privileged, champagne popsicle lifestyle on social media to gasps at the pure fabulousness of all that it means to be Ivanka Trump.  As her father makes the US government the world's laughing stock, Ivanka is tweeting 'letters' from kids telling her how wonderful she is.  She is enveloped by her role as the Trump family 'nice' one, the pretty face of capitalism and greed, with her soothing (or creepy) monotone voice, she avoids controversy and expressive adjectives. 

Ivanka has got thus far by portraying herself as the voice of reason and indeed enlightenment, she cheered on her gay and transgender friends in the way a racist says they have a black friend.  Are any of them impressed one wonders, with her silence on her dad's recent spiteful ruling?  And does dare pick up the phone to the fabulous climate campaigner Leo DiCaprio and say 'what do you think of me now'? 

There is also some solace to be had for those fashionistas out there who want to bitch.  Whilst most of us despair of not having anything to wear, Melania and Ivanka have overflowing wardrobes, and nowhere to go. 

*  If, Rudyard Kipling
**Bill Maher show I believe

Friday 25 August 2017


Not believing the McCanns does not make me, or anyone else a bad person, and in fact I would go so far as to say, pretending to believe is being complicit.  Those of you accusing me of being a bad person, are putting the parents' feelings above the fate of the missing child.  And they are complicit in the spiteful campaign to wreck the life of the former detective Goncalo Amaral.

I may not be a God botherer or a pillar of the community, but I have my own, very strict, moral guidelines.  That teen angst, that desire for martyrdom has never left me, death before dishonour. I will not be forced to believe something that isn't true. I was being battered daily in a convent at the time, so you can why I feel quite strongly on this issue. 

But, as I say to my Catholic friends, whatever gets you through the night, but please do not try to force your beliefs on me.  With the McCann supporters however, they just won't take no for an answer.  They demand we all believe as blindly as they do.  Fortunately Gerry and Kate do not have the power to burn heretics at the stake, nor even the power to have them standing in a dock.  And those helping them, are assisting the madness.
Badmouthing me won't make the situation any better, it is simply more bullying on the part of Team McCann.  I challenge them because I believe what they are doing is evil.  Their hounding and pursuit of Goncalo Amaral and Brenda Leyland for example, was evil. Both innocent people - and those doing the hounding knew that.  They wanted to take his family home and all the proceeds from his books.  They had already prevented him from earning a living, but that wasn't enough.  That knowledge sends a chill through me

In this instance, for some unknown reason, Team McCann are again complaining about those who troll them in social media.  And, as I said in my previous blog, why now? I fear the trolling of the McCanns is again being used to herald in new laws to remove anyone considered subversive, from the internet.  Which of course, is a direct attack on our Freedom of Speech.  It is no secret that there are factions within Team McCann actively working towards finding ways and means to police the internet.  Many want the rabble removed and in the dock, including less talented writers who want 'Opinion' restricted to the elite. 

For the majority of people (without issues) however, internet trolling is no more than a gnat bite, especially those in the public eye.  For them it is part and parcel of 'fame', they enjoy the perks, they suffer the loons.  They don't make a big deal of it, because it isn't a big deal.  If I paid attention to all the hate mail I have received over the years, I would be in a padded cell, wearing a straitjacket.  Ok, some might say, I should be.  Those drawing attention to their trolls are actually drawing attention to themselves, it is a variation on 'poor me'. 

But I don't want to get into the psychological aspects of trolling, for the moment, it is the way that it is being used for sinister, political purposes.  Gerry and Kate are the faces of Hacked Off, and those pressure groups that demand stricter controls on the press and social media.  Whilst other 'celebrities' appear to have seen the light and backed away, Gerry and Kate have continued to make their case as victims of an unscrupulous press and a lawless internet. They want action.  They want legislation that will shut down blogs like mine, and it would appear, shut down entire hashtags on twitter.  Again, with the God complex.

Information is as it is.  Tis my belief, the new Masters of the Universe reside in Silicone Valley, and they won't stop the flow of information for greedy capitalists or those insisting on ridiculous safeguards that protect no-one, least of all today's teens.  Kids today, know more about online safety than most of these online safety experts ever will.  Hands up every mum, who has learned all their internet etiquette from their kids? Even if you add the proviso, kids over 10, quite a few hands would still remain up.  The best protection any parent can give a child is confidence.  And happily most parents know that.  Those kids who are vulnerable, will have more issues than being groomed by an online predator in Kurdistan.

The idea that you can remove, let's call them what they are, deplorables*, from the internet is as ludicrous as removing deplorables from the streets.  It is something you just can't legislate against, and heaven knows, governments throughout history have tried.  Perhaps it should be remembered, that the elite, also tried to keep electricity and telephones to themselves, along with the right to vote.

Anyway, apologies for the Marxist lecture, lol, my gut instinct is to protect the freedom of the internet.  Since it's invention, I have been walking on Cloud 9.  So much to read, so little time.  I fear this may be a short lived period in our history, a new Age of Enlightenment, and one that the powers that be, will have to control if they are to maintain the status quo.  The Arab Spring showed how quickly a revolution can begin.  Boris ordered a job lot of water canons.  The US are now using tear gas and pepper spray - I wonder if Theresa May will ask Trump for a discount if crowd control armaments are among the US weapons he is trying to flog?  She may well need tear gas and pepper spray when The Donald rides down The Mall in a gold carriage with the Queen. 

But I don't want to digress.  Having watched the schemes and machinations of Team McCann over the years, this present distress is, I believe, nothing to do with internet trolls.  Unless of course, Professor Synnott is preparing a paper that argues the case for government action on anti social internet behaviour.  Why else count the tweets on the McCann hashtag every day?  Has it never occurred to Professor Synnott that the Madeleine case is unique (unique in the UK, the US have several) and that there might be a reason why these obsessive compulsives are spamming that hashtag every day.  If you take away their reason for doing it, you are making the entire paper invalid - what it was that set them off? 

The Madeleine case is unique, as is the position the parents find themselves in.  There are no forums or facebook groups questioning other families ripped apart by the trauma of losing a child.  Quite rightly, the idea of it would be horrendous, we would not want to add to their pain.  Unfortunately for Gerry and Kate, they have never been believable, and their abduction story makes no sense to any logical person.  How far we take that disbelief is of course open to debate.  I agree, this case has attracted more than it's far share of weirdos and stalkers, on many sides, but as a psychologist maybe Dr. Synnott should be addressing the obsessive compulsive disorder.  He should also acknowledge this case is in no way typical of online troll behaviour.   

I don't know what kind of cure Dr. Synnott is looking for with his troll study, but if he is omitting the root cause, then the cure he is seeking will be legislative. 

*Thanks Hillary. 

Monday 21 August 2017



Again, Gerry and Kate are in the tabloids complaining about the abuse they receive from online trolls.  Nobody could blame them, I'm sure, apparently they receive around 150 abusive tweets per day, according to psychologist Dr. John Synott who recently carried out a study on internet trolls.

My question is why now?  The Forums and the Facebook pages are at an all time low and the McCann hashtag on twitter is known to be occupied by a small group of obsessive compulsive sociopaths with a very niche audience, most people avoid it.  The 'troll' problem for the McCanns was solving itself, the trolls, like most of those who followed this case, have moved on. 

I can't help wondering if Dr. Synott, who seems to have a hand in this, has ever heard of the Streisand Effect? The phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicising the information more widely.  Usually facilitated by the Internet'.  Just saying.

The warning about criticising the McCanns' parenting has been on their Facebook Page for years, and it was far more, err, forceful, than the one that has made the news today.  So again I ask, why now?

Gerry and Kate say they are not on social media.  That, I'm afraid sounds like many whoppers that have gone before - I doubt they been off their laptops since 2007.  If they have kept charts of their social media mentions (and I'm sure they have), this is probably one of the quietest periods they have ever had.  In fact, had they continued with the 'don't feed the trolls' policy they already had in place, even the diehards would have given up.

I'm amazed to be honest that Gerry and Kate are still bothered by internet trolls.  They don't seem to understand that the only power they personally have over the internet and those abusive tweets, is the way in which they react to them.  Having each and every one of their critics removed from the internet won't make the problem go away, just as suing one newspaper didn't stop others.  

Could it be that the parents of Madeleine McCann are still useful to those who would like to police the internet?  Those who want tough new laws to clamp down on subversives and the spread of information?  Or are they expecting some sort of media avalanche?  


On the 10th anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance, Gerry and Kate should have been inundated with offers to tell their side of the story, and perhaps they were, but methinks more of the same was not what the news networks wanted.  That is approved questions and the go ahead from Clarence on the final cut.

The only way in which Gerry and Kate can now change the paradigm is with honesty.  It is their last resort.  Lies do not become more believable with the addition of more lies. They kick off a whole tangled web that can keep social media buzzing for a decade. 

All the McCanns attempts to win friends and influence people via social media have resulted in grotesque spectacles of the lowest form of human behaviour.   Even in those earliest days, way back in 2007, Team McCann were aggressively attacking all those online who didn't believe the abduction story.  At the time I, and I'm sure many others, simply thought they were very enthusiastic supporters, perhaps going rogue, but many of the 'same' ones are still here, still angry and still cussing the dogs. 

Their tactics were pure Nazi thuggery, they were collecting the names of all those who spoke out against the abduction theory, finding their details on Facebook etc, and placing their photos and details on a website called 'Exposing the Myths'.  Threats were made to 'expose' them to their employers (in my case my publishers), friends, neighbours, families etc, as 'haters'.  A precursor to what actually happened to Brenda Leyland.  Indeed, in the days prior to Brenda's Leyland's 'naming and shaming', Jim Gamble was on TV putting all of us on notice. 

This Blacklist, vile as it was it, was effective to a certain extent, and began a tradition of people commenting on this case anonymously.  In the forums, the sane quickly made a fast exit, not just because they were being insulted and threatened, but because they simply didn't need that shit in their lives.  The less sane among us, decided to stay and fight.  And the main weapon used against us, was the smearing of our characters.  In my case, I was a 'known' drug user with mental health issues.  I lost count of the amount of blogs and articles written by both 'pros' and 'antis' that were nothing more than character assassinations complete with obscene photoshopped pictures using my head. The Blacklist, or as it has become known, the Death Dossier, had over 140 pages on me!  Screenshots of every comment I made on social media within minutes of my posting, with my words deliberately distorted. 

The McCann army, and it is an army, though much shrunken, have always used 'attack' as their first form of defence.  Discredit the messenger.  Mrs Fenn, heartless old lady, Ms Martin, interfering busybody.  Anyone who doesn't believe them, hater.  This tactic is so ingrained, that they are incapable of rational, reasonable, argument.  How can anyone have a debate with someone who comes to the table believing his peers are morally and intellectually, inferior to him?  And this has been the premise of every pro McCann forum, and indeed, every pro McCann.  Gerry, Kate and all those who follow them with blind belief, took the higher ground from the off, when they rediscovered their Catholic religion and  became the epitome of bad things happening to good people. 

On the higher moral ground, they can dodge and ignore all the mud slung at them, treating those questions they don't like, as beneath contempt.  And unfortunately, this is the attitude they bring with them whenever they attempt to argue the McCanns innocence.  What they have never been able to grasp, is that you never begin a show by insulting the audience.  Shouting 'are you that stupid' may work (temporarily) on a trembling adolescent, but online it makes you look like a pompous, bullying, twat. 

For all the fortunes Gerry and Kate have spent on favourable publicity, they still remain unable to put forward a believable explanation for their strange behaviour and the lack of an abductor 10+ years on.  After an endless legal battle, their foe has finally defeated them.  Perhaps they believed a victory in Lisbon would reverse the tide, enabling them to return them to those heady summer days of 2007, before the 'movies got too small'.  Of course it may just have been vengeance on Goncalo Amaral, they desired.  Vengeance in this case became a form of insanity. 

In less than 2 weeks time, Operation Grange are due to make another announcement.  Most of the money is on another extension I am sure. but I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess the British side of the investigation will close, and all their findings will be passed to the Portuguese.  Where SY might struggle, will be their promise to provide the parents with an answer, they have been working on behalf of the victims, ergo, for their sake, it cannot be left open ended.  Unless Operation Grange clear the parents and the tapas group completely, nothing will have changed.  They will still be left in limbo, with all the crazies snapping at their heels. 

Some might argue that Scotland Yard have been horribly cruel, I certainly would if I were a 'pro' - because effectively they have been withholding information that could have given Gerry and Kate closure long ago.  Living under the shadow of a police investigation all this time must be unbearably stressful. It could be of course be that SY have already told Gerry and Kate 'the worst', that they are not looking for a live child, but that is something they would never admit publicly.  I think it is a given however, because there have been no age progression pictures, and no active fundraising on the part of Madeleine's Fund.

I think if Operation Grange had given the parents and their friends any proof positive that absolved them, they would have got it onto the front pages of the tabloids and they would have been back chatting to morning television hosts.  Goncalo Amaral once said (on Blacksmith I believe) that 'it's not going well for the McCanns'.  I think that applies now more than ever, they great victory they hoped for in Lisbon has become their biggest loss [I predict record legal costs].  Up until it was all over, fighting talk was all they had.  They can keep sniping at GA, but he beat them fair and square.

For Gerry and Kate to win back any sort of public sympathy, they will have to begin with humility and truth.  Maybe start with floods of tears like a repentant Baptist preacher caught with his hands in the till and up the skirt of a local lapdancer/fallen woman.  If they are true Catholics, they will know all about breastbeating, repenting and forgiveness.  It's a great cop out for all murderous deeds, and you don't even need to say it until you take your final breath. 

Gerry and Kate of course, and all those in the know, could find consolation in the truth now, while they still have some kind of hand on the rudder.  There will be some who will forgive them, maybe even some who would still defend them.  Their best defence is 'everything they have done, they have done for their children'.  That's a powerful and persuasive argument, but it will be stacked up against all those deeds that could be said to have made their children (albeit unknowingly) complicit.

As for those spitting sawdust and feathers on behalf of Gerry and Kate, I often get feelings of deja vu. a reliving of battles from years ago in the forums.  I now have no doubt that it is the inner circle of Team McCann who have devoted themselves to patrolling the internet and hijacking Madeleine discussions.  They were the online fighting wing of TM from the start (as confirmed by Michael Wright in Lisbon) - using social media to close debate on the Madeleine case.  Not with reasonable and logical arguments, but with bullying and threats, as if waving a cyber fist will elicit anything other than hoots of laughter. 

Saturday 12 August 2017


UPDATE - 16-08-2017

I'm delighted to say normal service on my blog has resumed.  There was almost a hostile takeover there for a while, dark forces were wearing me down with their anger and hostility. 

I hasten to say, I had no objections to Ziggy offering an alternate perspective, but eventually, even I could see that he had a firm agenda to break down what he would call 'myths' supposedly born of Goncalo Amaral's book and discussed constantly on social media.  He is the unwanted 'Admin' keeping my readers on his topic. 

Effectively, he was attempting to steal my blog, from under my nose, and as a bleeding heart liberal I was allowing him to.  The turning point came, when I realised that he didn't actually like it here.  He had no respect for me and no respect for my readers, it was then that I was hit by the overwhelming smell of coffee. A very fine one too, Americano, my current fav instant. 

My critics were right of course, I was being dim.  The USP of every blog, is the blogger's personality.  It is a wonderfully narcissistic reflection of your life and times, not quite a personal journal, but not too far away.  Ziggy was taking over, changing the tone and format of the discussion. Worse, he was bringing in the kind of nastiness seen only in the forums. Nitpicking and repeating every line, so he could respond with a thousand words, where one or two would do. 

Regardless, I am back to looking forward to opening my postbox, I always enjoy reading alternate views and the interesting topics that arrive with each new post.  Normal Service has been Resumed!


Gaw'd knows what's happening to it [my blog] 18:49, most of it is above my head too! Since I mentioned the Hadron Collider and Tolkien, the Boy's Own have taken over. As the mother of two sons, both the aforementioned are forbidden topics in my home!  On their part, I am not allowed to discuss Madeleine McCann or the divine gowns worn at the Oscars.   

I am not sure if the forces at work here are dark or mischievous, some may be testing how far they can go off topic before I become like every forum host who has gone before me.  Some slip through due to the sheer volume of incoming, and some are not caught by my 'spam' catcher.  Ziggy, I'm afraid, I only skim read, he has lost my attention. And ex husbands everywhere must know that feeling.  For my inattention to Ziggy's rants, I must apologise, not only is he disrespecting me, he is disrespecting my readers and other posters.  But as you will see from my reply to him today, my patience is running out.

I am a great believer in the concept that debate/ discussion will naturally find it's own level 18:49 with minimal intervention.  I like to think my blog is an level playing field, where everyone has equal opportunity to present their case.  The popular posts get more responses, or should I say more positive responses, and those with flaws have those flaws pointed out. 

Ziggy plays Devil's Advocate, or he tries out possible scenarios that will alleviate Gerry and Kate of any blame.  He is fuzzy on his knowledge of this case, hoping it will make him appear as the outsider he pretends to be. He hasn't read Goncalo Amaral's  book, but he knows every sniffer gland on the end of a spaniel's nose.  He knows those parts of the McCann abduction story that are weak, and those are the ones he keeps plugging, and of course, where his 'expertise' lies. 

He doesn't bother with Bennett, HideHo, Hall et al, because they aren't a threat, they will only ever appeal to a gullible, niche, audience.  And besides which, they have always supported the parents' case that they have been victimised because of Goncalo Amaral's book.  And whilst in very arrogant mode, the McCanns with all their high priced lawyers and prize winning authors etc, didn't destroy Bennett and Hall - I did.  One of the reasons, Kate needs me for her book, btw. 

My blog however, is a different kettle of fish.  It has intelligent readers and intelligent contributors and it can in no way be described as a 'hate site'.  That is getting through, and that is why my blog is becoming so popular.  There is no 'shame' attached to posting here, it is a reasonable discussion among reasonable people.  I don't investigate people, I don't put them on public trial, and I don't find them guilty in a kangaroo court. 

But let's return to those dark forces 18:49.  I have made lots of enemies along the way - I have no idea why, I'm really quite charming!  But it is as it is.  I have frustrated many dreams, I am the Mozart to their Antonio Salieri (though Salieri is giving them too much credit), They may have spent a zillion hours researching and finding links, but it's Cristobell Unbound who makes no claims for anything, that the followers of the Madeleine case want to read.  That's got to irk. 

Those who are genuinely seeking the truth in the McCann case, are watching as developments unfold, as is this blog.  Like the rest of the world, they have moved on from 2007.  They have little, if any, interest in the scurrilous tales that began in cheap tabloid headlines and that were picked up by porn sleuths, who thought they had stumbled across the Sodom and Gomorrah, the Good Lord warned them about.  Enter Bennett, Hall, Textusa and Hyatt. And an honourable mention for Jim Gamble.  All of whom are currently trapped in a timewarp. 

This blog has always been under attack from dark forces 18:49.  JG for example has warned me on twitter that I am not to say anything libellous about him or the US NCMEC, and JG is a ex cop, who has used counter intelligence all his working life.  I have no doubt, I am watched very closely.  They live in trepidation of the day I write a blog entitled 'J'Accuse', or maybe an article that closely examines the role in society of missing children's charities and dedicated police agencies.  An alternate title, might be, 'the way in which the Government and the 'Establishment' ensure we all live in fear'.  Then there is the involvement of MI5, MI6 and the death of Brenda Leyland.  A little paranoid I know, but one of the reasons I stay in plain sight and constantly reassure people that I am not in the least bit suicidal. 

Should I ever decide to kill myself, it would be in a sleazy nightclub in New Orleans after having sung all of Billy Holiday's greatest hits to a cheering audience who love my sparkly dress, and having taken copious amounts of drugs and alcohol, and said 'they shoot horses don't they'.  My sons however, recommend Dignitas or a holiday in Syria.  How I wish the anti feminist Good Lord had given me daughters - they would be ruling the world by now!

But I digress.  The McCann camp, I think, are very unsure.  They want to condemn me, but they can see how I can be used to their advantage.  And I should add, I am the last chance saloon, if the worst comes to the worst option, but look at what they have had so far?  If they know anything about PR, and they really should by now, Gerry should have that white board out looking at the wider agenda.  They can still make amends, and they can still provide for their children. 

But before hubris swallows me entirely, my audience may drop dramatically should I axe Ziggy, but now he is lowering the tone of my blog, that matters less and less.  My blog is precious to me.  It is a 'work of art' of some sort, lol.  I hope my 'other' works, of which there are many, will be my 'legacy' (hopefully profitable, lol), but this is a baby I dote on and nurture.

I don't take online stuff personally, which is why I have been able to read and observe the  bizarre behaviour in forums.  I have observed the Cesspit and the pro McCann counter campaign with a mixture of disgust and fascination.  Long ago, that freaky behaviour reached that point in Animal Farm, where the pigs become indistinguishable from the men.  The bloodlust, on both sides, is quite bizarre in the 21st century.  The gravity of it brought to mind my own personal awakening, when I realised that fascism and communism eventually become one.  A bit off topic I know, but an anecdote that reflects the shock of my realisation that a lot of the 'antis' were very mean people with issues of their own!

What makes them mean 18:29 - who knows?  A lasting grudge that life has treated them badly, a belief that anyone and everyone around them is to blame for current or past misfortunes and their own dissatisfaction with life.  They will always look around for someone else to blame and they will never be mature enough to understand that they are responsible for their life choices.  They alone make every decision.  Of course Neitzche  (sp) said it far more eloquently than I.   

I don't in any way want to curb the spontaneity and freedom of speech of those who post here 18:29, and in my experience, even the tiniest beginnings of rule making sets in motion the kind of dictatorial state that none of us want. 

But I am waffling, which is certain to irritate my critics - they are only here to find subversive or libellous statements, lol so the fluff must grate, not intentional of course.  All my own personal haters have tried every trick in the book to close me down or label me a headcase  or establishment plant 18:29, including  social media smear campaigns from both sides.  But in the words of Chumba Wumba, I get knocked down, I get back up again

The greatest threat to my blog is a poster who can change the dominant ideology - I think most who read here, believe the parents and Tapas group were involved.  But as yet, no-one has emerged who can sway the majority over to 'The McCanns are Innocent' - and I fear Ziggy is their best shot.  He is trying lots of theories here, but none of them are 'taking', I'm  not sure he has persuaded anyone, and heaven know, I've given him enough tries. 

I do take heed and listen to the advice of my contributors 18:29, 'ask the audience' is always the best option, but I still lean towards the goodies will always win over the baddies.  They don't need the odds altered in their favour. I have confidence in my own ability to challenge misinformation, but more so, I have confidence in my readers, who more often than not, present far more concise and articulate arguments than my own! 

Saturday 5 August 2017


I am being invaded by 'dark forces' apparently, my first thoughts were Batman, the Dark Knight, and hopefully the Michael Keaton one.  To be fair, I hadn't yet had my first cup of tea and had just awoken from an amazing dream that I cannot now remember, doh!

Dark forces indeed - not quite sure how to define that.  There are a number of people who would very much like to see my blog retired, I'm sure, but I feel they are mostly from the 'anti' side.  I am a big old fly in the ointment of their deranged theories.  Bennett especially who had his heart set on being the leader of a well funded cult. 

With the 'pro' McCanns and the McCann camp, I have never said anything libellous, not only because I am fully au fait with Libel Law, but because I have my own very high standards of social etiquette. I do wonder how some of these people (both sides) were raised that they think it normal to be so rude to strangers online. 

I tend to think that people who are abusive to others, online or indeed, anywhere, are quite literally revealing their own inner troubles.  And I don't think any of us are immune to it.  When I look back on the (I promise!) very rare occasions I have 'snapped', it is usually because I have had bigger troubles elsewhere.  It is an unfortunate aspect of human behaviour, but one, most of us are able to keep in check.  It is hard I know, when someone is shouting at you, to imagine that it is themselves they hate, but tis true. 

I was blessed in having a father who was one of life's gentlemen, from the top of his 'hat for every occasion', to his highly polished shoes. He treated EVERYONE with respect, and his good manners and quiet charm made an impression on everyone who met him.  Such is life, I took after my mad, fiery, Irish mother - Lord knows how those two got together, lol. My mother's behaviour, he was never able to contain (no-one could, lol), but with myself he was able to smooth a lot of the rough edges.  He never disciplined me, but he would explain the impact my words could have on others and I would cry like a baby. 

Don't ever hurt somebody just because you can, my Dad would tell me in his thick, Dundonian accent, and his words are never far from my thoughts.  And it would be fair to say, they have tormented me many times - that is, I have been tempted to unleash 'my powers' many times, but it would cause me more pain than it would the recipient.  I don't get the need to make another person feel bad - and I have no ideas on punishment whatsoever, which is why I steer clear of the whole Law and Order thing. I've never understood how hurting and demeaning someone can make them a better person.   

I would have made a terrible executioner in the days of old, I probably would have got the knitting hags, the guards and the audience, singing a rousing rendition of 'We Shall Overcome'.  I'm still in love with Jonathan Rhys-Myers (hence still in history mode) and hear he is fond of the liquor.  Maybe I can ply him with the hard stuff and convince him I'm a 30 year old wench lol, (and yes there IS enough Potcheen in Ireland, to the smartass at the back).  I would however, have to insist on the cod piece and the Crown.  I know this could lead to my head being removed from my neck, but totally worth it. 

But I digress, probably because I have a zillion things to do and am looking for ways to put them off, lol. No-one has the power to 'shut my blog' down. I don't advocate hate - never have, I'm a peace loving old hippy chick.  Though it may not seem that way, my interests are academic, this case opens doors to just about every 'ology out there.  I think in studying this case, I have learned more about psychology, human behaviour, politics, society and culture, than if I had spent equal time with my nose in dedicated books.

I have to admit I was miffed at not getting a mention in the Summers and Swan book, or indeed any of the hyperbole that was going on prior to the doorstep siege on Brenda Leyland.  And of course, my name has been erased from the forums and facebook pages - that I am despised on twitter is a given.  Why? Because I am offering a civilised forum where all opinions are welcome.  There are no rules, because rules are really not my kind of thing. As if! lol.

I started this blog with faith in the goodness of human nature. I believed that open discussion and debate would eventually find it's own level.  Brusque words are spoken, and much is said in jest, but it has never become a slagging match of he saids, she saids, or personal insults.  It has grown and it has attracted many talented writers, people with the intellect to understand it is not necessary to be a deplorable to question the validity of the abduction story.

Happily, my unpopularity is not reflected in my viewing numbers and I must admit I get a buzz from the new traffic feed chart - especially when I see far away and exotic places!  People read here I think, because it is an open forum, I don't ban or censor people for disagreeing with me - I welcome it actually, because it gets the old brain cells flowing.   

People are drifting away from the outlandish theories, they are beginning to see them in the cold light of day. 10+ years on, they sound even more ridiculous than they did when the tabloids were virtually making stuff up to get a McCann headline.  I don't suppose for one moment they thought there would be eejits out there who would take those salacious headlines and make them their life's work.  All those stories of child abuse and bed hopping, are now being seen by those following this case and those new to it, for the unsavoury nonsense it is.   

For those convinced I am 'pro' , they have much evidence.  My blog too, has I think, calmed much of the hatred and hysteria that surrounded this case.  More so than their lawyers and spin doctors, lol.  All their Lawsuits and angry pronouncements made them more enemies than friends.  Not entirely their fault, much of the hatred was stirred up by those who have tried their damnedest to turn a tragic event into an international crime.  A heinous crime, involving the worst kind of perversity they have been able to come up with.  And worse.  They have named, accused and found, innocent bystanders of being complicit unnamed heinous crime, based on nothing other than their (freaky) imaginations.  People like Tony Bennett, Richard Hall who flew all the way to the US to have a dirty discussion with a dirty minded old preacher in the Midwest.  I find it absolutely astonishing that anyone believes that stuff.

But I should of course comment on the result of the poll - and this is where I get confused.  It would appear the 'yeses' have it, but not if you combine the 'Nos' and 'don't know's.  In any event it is a terrible reflection on our Government and Police that, let's call it 50/50 for the moment, that half the audience think they are corrupt.  But even before we reach that conclusion, it could be said this blog has a niche audience.  I don't flatter myself that people come here to read me, they come here to read about the Madeleine case (well, a bit me, lol), that is, my blog is a cornucopia of sane and cross party public opinion.  The Facebook pages have had their day, even the forums are struggling, with wandering big gobs looking to them for refuge. 

But back to the poll.  With a general audience I suspect the figure would be 70/80% to the 'Nos', but that could be split by adding a 'don't care' option.  The anger and the hysteria has gone, mellowed not only by time, but by the realisation of so many 'Mcann' watchers, that they had actually crossed that line and become OCD loons.  They were following the preachings of mad men and women, on the female front, HideHo and the biscuit muncher deserve an honourable mention. 

People are still seeking the truth, but they know now they will not find it in the batshit crazy theories of Bennett, Hall and Hyatt  plus his devoted (and probably only) student hobnob eater.  I don't know what HideHo's theory is, apart from the fact that she is accusing innocent young women of being part of a heinous crime.  Oh and I can't bear the music on the videos. 

But that poll.  I suspect the 'yeses' are made up of varying parts:

1.  The cynical, who have seen too many scandals whitewashed in the past. Hillsborough, Stephen Lawrence, Daniel Morgan etc.

2.  Those who believe dark forces are covering up the involvement of VIPs, possibly politicians, billionaires, celebrities, holiday resort nannies for nefarious reasons, possibly:

     i)     Downing Street and our security forces made a huge error by interfering in a criminal investigation overseas. 

     ii)    Someone of greater importance than the Queen, the PM and the Donald combined was visiting PDL for the annual orgy season, hosted by Warners Family Resort (kids and elderly relatives welcome).  Never mind yachts and Lolita flights, cut price, off season PDL is THE place to be.  As long you don't mind kids screeching at your bondage gear. 

   iii)   The police both here and Portugal have become so fond of Gerry and Kate, they are willing to risk their careers and reputations to protect them.

So there we have it.  In my opinion 2) i) has kept the details hidden this past 10 years, but I do not believe it will ever be sustainable.  As John Blacksmith said recently, the truth will find a way out. 

2) ii) is just nonsense.  Why do alleged huge sex scandals always involve VIPs and celebrities. What about Fred the plumber, or Harry the brickie?  Or indeed, any other not world famous, drunken Uncle who tries to tries to grope the bridesmaids.

2) iii) Whatever charismatic, mesmerising effect, Gerry and Kate may have on those they meet or hypnotise via the telly, I'm just not seeing.  Nor do I believe Gerry is involved in top secret scientific research or cloning.  If Operation Grange were covering up for Gerry and Kate, why not let them in on it?  Why prolong their agony?  In my opinion, this is where the cover up argument fails. If the purpose was to get Gerry and Kate off the hook, why didn't they do that 6 years ago?  They may have announced the parents and their friends weren't suspects, but they didn't produce anything to confirm that.  Eg. Phone records, witness statement, even a lie detector test.  On it's own, it is meaningless.

But the countdown begins, just a month to go, before Operation Grange finally closes up shop.  They have done absolutely amazingly on keeping everything they have under wraps.  I personally don't think it is for nefarious reasons, and the compliment was genuine.  Having watched way too many real crime/dramas, I fully understand the frustration of the police.  Real crimes are not solved within an hour (including adverts), sometimes they go on for many years, and yes, even decades.  But there are 'Goncalo Amarals' the world over, that is determined cops who will never give up on the victim. 

With the case of Madeleine 'someone' has decided not to let it drop.  Letting it drop incidentally, would be the best way to cover it up, deh!  And it would be the best result for Gerry and Kate.  They are unable to hide the strain of living under an investigation, they more than anyone, need to know what conclusions Operation Grange have reached.  But who won't drop it?  Many officers I'm sure, but also, I suspect, Theresa May.  She was threatened with her face being on the front page of the Sun every day and ordered by her boss, David Cameron, to give the McCanns a Review.  Just my opinion, but the amount of money ploughed in, and the lack of information given out, suggests unwillingness to let it drop, comes from above.