Saturday 28 July 2018


Madeleine's disappearance had pound/dollar signs all over it, almost immediately. Not only were the McCanns trying to build an empire on their daughter's tragedy, but so too were all those jostling for a slice of the cake. Police agencies and charities used the iconic cherubic Madeleine picture to remind us of the vital work they do.  
I don't think there can be any doubt that the way in which Madeleine's disappearance was reported came from the 'top'. It wasn't until several years later that the public became aware of the cosying up of Prime Ministers and media moguls, but the enlightened among us knew before.
The 'top' in this case is most likely Tony Blair.  By 2007, he knew how to use and manipulate, not only the media, but the secret services.  If he stated the parents were innocent, it was the party line. He had appointed to top positions, people he could control and henchmen who would ensure his orders were obeyed. Who knows what means he used, but it might be worth noting that he had under his belt, thousands of names collected during Operation Ore.  All hypothetical of course, but considering the lengths he went to, to take us into an illegal war, anything is possible. 
What were the benefits to New Labour of siding with the parents and promoting the abduction story? Where to begin. Blair had reached that stage of leadership where he believed he was all powerful, he wasn’t quite referring to himself as the Thatcher ‘we’, but he wasn’t far off it.  Our forefathers had the good sense to prepare for the mad as a box of frogs leadership stage, by ensuring PMs don’t serve more than two terms. The backstabbing of their friends and colleagues takes care of the rest.
In 2007, New Labour were promoting the idea of compulsory Identity Cards, and all the benefits of compiling a national database, which would include our DNA.  Only pedophiles and criminals have anything to fear they said, thus sparking social media division as the sanctimonious preached the benefits of a national database, while accusing those who could see all the dangers of being criminally minded and worse.
For the benefit of those wearing blinkers and ear plugs and the terminally thick, let me shout it out. A database holding all our private and confidential details is a huge threat to democracy.  Theoretically a ruling government could stay in power forever.  Eleven years on my fears are now moot - we already give so much of ourselves on social media, the ‘Lists’ have been compiled. Eg. Cambridge Analytica.  We could say at least these lists are not compiled by a sitting government, but it’s worse, they are being compiled by people who know what they are doing. Apparently it is possible profile a person’s character from just 10 tweets.
In reflecting on this case, we have to consider the political and cultural climate in 2007. The internet was in its infancy, and all sorts of entrepeneurs and wannabe billionaires were thinking up ways in which to capitalise on the wonders of the world wide web. Dr. Evils everywhere were stroking cats and dreaming of world domination. Top of a wannabe tyrant's wish list would have been a database of every citizen containing their entire medical, financial and possibly criminal records. Accessible to who? Government employees, the police, the local authorities, vindictive neighbours?  
How do you persuade voters that a national database is the best idea since sliced bread? You create fear. Fear of terrorism for example, rouses up the patriots and the right wing loons do the rest. For a government eager to bring in ID cards and compulsory DNA testing, the disappearance of Madeleine was manna from heaven.  Possibly the most appealing tot ever to have gone missing, her face was used unscrupulously to suggest children being taken from their beds was a regular occurrence, and every child was at risk.  If it could happen to responsible, highly educated professionals, it could happen to anyone.  
That was Myth One. If that wasn’t enough to send anxious parents scuttling to have their babies DNA stored and tracking chips planted under their skin, it was supported by Myth Two. There are thousands of pedophiles, disguised as normal people, lurking in our midst.  Especially on the internet.  A special force was needed to track them down to prevent further ‘Madeleines’.  They were desperately trying to link the disappearance of 3 year old Madeleine to grooming online.  The still new internet offered all sorts of opportunities to gain access to people’s personal online activity.  Some hoped, and still hope, that Law and Order can be imposed on the internet.  Undesirables removed and all that sort of thing.  Crime has changed, pickpockets no longer knock you over the head and steal your purse, they friend you on social media and get your bank details. 
 Whilst the police might have identified new areas of crime on the internet their powers are pretty much restricted by our rights to freedom of speech. There is no actual physical violence, and it is debateable whether really, really, horrible words, are just as hurtful as a punch in the mouth.  Unfortunately, oiks are oiks wherever they may be, they cannot be removed from society just as they cannot be removed from the internet.  Cries of shock, horror and 'it shouldn't be allowed' won't ever make social media a walk in the park for the easily offended, and to be fair, shock/horror is pretty much what the troll is going for.  Dragging social inadequate off in chains will never remove the problem of getting rid off those who disagree with you online.  Just as soon as you hang one unwashed miscreant upside down in a dungeon, a hundred more appear.  The sane get that.  The fearful and the paranoid do not.  And in any event, an internet crime force wouldn’t have prevented Madeleine from being taken, she was  only 3, she didn't use the internet.
But back to the machinations of those in power.  As daft as the masses are most of the time, they still have to be persuaded that handing over all their personal details and blood, is for the greater good.  Most of the Madeleine publicity was about spreading the fear.  It broke friendships and divided family like no other human interest story in history. Those who believed in abduction, also believed in the ‘Bogeyman’ and the need for tanks to be sent into Heathrow.  Non believers were subversives on the outer fringes of society, united by their intense hatred of anyone goodlooking or well off. Malcontents, driven by emotion and envy, the backstreet kids laughing at the Emperor in the nip, whilst the sanctimonious and smug middle classes admired the fine cloth.  
As if young parents didn’t have enough to worry about, they now had to fear their children being stolen from their beds. Not that anyone would have been stupid and reckless enough to leave their babies alone in a holiday apartment in the first place.  To convince us of the parents fragrant lifestyle, we were sold decent, God fear, law abiding folks.  The McCanns became Stepford’s First Family.  Perfect in every way.  Perfect home, perfect marriage, perfect friends (‘do you have faith in your friends Kate?’ ‘Yes, 100%’) perfect holiday - no discord whatsoever. OK, it was mostly Team McCann selling Gerry and Kate as the world’s most responsible parents, but it gelled with New Labour’s agenda to scare the bejesus out of anyone with kids.  
The McCanns wanted stricter border controls, Madeleine was ‘taken’ by a swarthy fellow. They wanted DNA stores, maybe even microchipping, more hell for people passing through borders. They also led the movement to gag the press. ALL stories about Madeleine should be run by them first. Most of their demands could have come straight from the script of a Trump Rally. From a NL perspective, they were probably thanking the McCanns for doing their job for them. Spreading the fear in order to introduce new legislation that would allow them to spy on anyone they wanted.    
As it turned out, the internet has not been the threat to our safety the fearmongers predicted.  They still cannot police social media, because it is owned by private individuals who’s aims are philanthropic. I side with Zuckerberg, not even he could have imagined the impact Facebook would have on democracy. He has reacted to the flaws in FB, obviously working towards new and innovative ways to keep FB to it’s original principles.  We should thank whatever Gods there may, that those on Silicon Valley are for the many, not the few. Blair’s hopes for social media included getting a slice of the action.  Jim Gamble for example wanted donations for his department, for providing a policing service that the owners of social media didn’t want and refused to pay for.  What brave new world is this that private individuals can tell PC Plod to naff off. These new Masters of the Universe, accept the concept of personal responsibility. Most people can be trusted to behave themselves online, to behave as they would in the ‘real’ world.  That’s why social media has been so successful.  Twitter for example, would never have got off the ground if it had begun with a bunch of monitors censoring every tweet.  
Social media is now the only battlefield - for literally everything. It is the political arena that dominates news worldwide. Major news stories are ‘chip paper’ within hours, sometimes minutes. Trump runs his presidency on twitter.  Literally anything he tweets will wipe all previous breaking news off the front pages. For winners of libel payouts, any victory they may have will be short lived.  On the internet, the libel laws of old barely apply, law making simply cannot keep up with the advances in technology.
But back in 2007, almost anything was possible, including brainwashing the public on a scale never seen before. That it didn’t work out, is just gravy now. Selling a child abduction story in 2007 was vastly different to how it would be today and history has been far from kind to the parents and the tapas group’s telling of events. And even less kind to the Madeleine Fund.
Madeleine’s disappearance tied in with the ‘pedophiles everywhere’ message the Blair government and certain individuals were trying to promote.  It was, as it were, at the  centre of a perfect storm. It fit like a missing piece to a puzzle, the sum of all our fears, a small innocent child stolen by one of these bogeymen they had been warning us about. Think of the children they yelled, as the sanctimonious are inclined to do.  Your children are prey to monsters unless they are fitted with tracking devices. Welcome to a future even the pessimistic George Orwell couldn’t imagine. 
Tough for Team McCann that things didn't work out quite as they had dreamed in 2007.  Despite all their libel actions, that cloud of suspicion hasn't gone away, and they can't move on until it does. They will of course still blame Goncalo Amaral, blind to the fact that their irrational hatred of the detective who searched for their daughter is one of the main reasons people do not believe them.   


  1. I believe you have gone mad Ros.

    1. Stating facts means Roz has gone mad?
      Anon,you must be from the Ronald Regan camp "facts are stupid things"

  2. Hi Rosalinda,
    Good post.
    Your explanation is spot on.

    I'm thinking about a slightly different turn of events which has to happen some day.
    Do you think there will be any end results to the Strange/Grange police investigation.

    Do police forces ever announce in-depth results of a failed investigation to the general public. I can't think of any.

    In this case, to avoid embarrassment about being in the pockets of government it would pay the police to hands down keep their mouths shut.
    I know you have often remarked on the upstanding moral background of most investigating police officers but however honest the investigators may be, it is the hierarchy who read the final "Grange" report and political damage control will be uppermost in their minds.
    And we are still a million miles from getting a prosecution which can only be done by the Portuguese judiciary.

    They didn't do it the first time, so will they try for it again?

    (pardon me, they did it, but their government backed out under British threats and axed their lead investigator Detective Inspector Goncalo Amaral, The man the parents were terrified of and was tunneling in on them.)

    Talk about influence in high places from a couple of know- nothing doctors later to become the internet darlings of the reality show circuit - all the while cashing in on the horror of their daughter's death. Sorry; Missing Daughter.

    Circumstantial evidence is so overwhelming, even a group of 10 year olds could figure it out. But "Operation Grange" not so much. Yet.

    1. Hi JC, sorry I missed your post too.

      I hear what you say about the decision not being in the hands of the ordinary officers, but I don't believe a cover up on this scale is possible. Every officer knows that at the end of the day they will be culpable if they have perverted the course of justice in any way. Their entire careers and their futures will be at stake. And there are just too many. Operation Grange began with 30+ homicide officers, all or any of them, could write their own books.

      The McCanns and the Authorities had shared goals. Gerry and Kate probably couldn't believe their luck when they found they had the full backing of the British Establishment. If MI5 or is 6, or indeed any of the British secret services discovered that the 'abduction' was not as it seemed, their findings were ignored by the incumbent New Labour government. Even the staff at the British embassy in Portugal were expressing concerns.

      The decision to continue pitching this case as an abduction obviously came from 'on high'. Blair at that time was fraternising with Rebekah Brooks, and if rumours are true, getting very cosy with the wife of Rupert Murdoch. Ditto David Cameron who granted everything Gerry and Kate wished for via the front page of The Sun.

      If the abduction wasn't an abduction, then all those 'fears' they were selling us were a load of bo**ox, all those warnings from Jim Gamble, all those stories about kidnappings, trafficking and burglars stealing the body of a dead child, ditto.

      Operation Grange has no option but to reveal their findings when the case closes. And if they did, the chances of someone whistleblowing, goes through the roof. All these officers have witnesses the way in the McCanns have treated Goncalo Amaral and know that but for the grace of God, it could be any one of them. The scam is over, we are just waiting for the public announcement to be pinned to the gate.

  3. Hi Ros,

    I've not replied for ages but have read every blog (keep 'em comin'), just taking it all in after 11 years. Your last 2 blogs (last one and this one) I especially enjoyed, as engaging as always.
    The above blog is 100% right, as in, that's what I perceive. Blair's (data harvesting) legacy easily passed onto Brown, Cameron and May. The central premise of 'fear' is the weapon of choice. Old as the hills (religion anyone?) but still as effective.
    So, that's all for now, apart from an update to my name... lol

    SixYearsInAComaMan now known as Dr Totman? << Could it get any more ridiculous?

    1. Apologies for allowing your post to slip under my radar SYIACM! How lovely to see you, and I am delighted that you are still reading my blogs :)

      The benefits of a child abduction, to the government, the police agencies, the charities and even the media are incalculable. Fear can make the public malleable, fear for their children, even more so. What happened to Madeleine could happen to any child, even those with responsible parents like Gerry and Kate. And having raised Gerry and Kate up onto an almost heroic pedestal, there will be many, many red faces.

      I haven't figured out the meaning, if any, to Dr. Totman, but to be honest I will always associate you with cultural ambassador and former Russian scientist, Sergei Meerkat ;)

  4. 2007 - internet Oh, we didn't have the speeds we have now, but in fact I would put it to you that it was actually BETTER, more organised, less suspicious. Take MF (Mirror Forum) were you there? I was. I remember the conversations, open HONEST (to some extent) and yes the mixed bag of monkeys to be sure, just as now. How do you think Nige collated his files and the translations were done from the PJ file. Has the internet moved on? .... it has. Less open, less honest. FB (Facebook) now MSM open source of information on 'victims' bet they never thought such information was at their finger-tips.

    The interesting parallels you draw, reminds me when I was a student psychiatric nurse, one master-class book of psychiatry, the bible of it's time had half a page on dementia, a line on Alzheimer's! people were deluded & hallucinated because of the 'gas' mantel lights. Faggin types roamed the streets of London (this book updated, as the years went by, but it proved nothing changes) all things in life move on and change - but really nothing has changed just 'names'\what we call it!

    Blair was a man of the people ............. well so he thought. Madeleine, or should we say the McCann's replaced Princess Di, both for Blair's PR purposes and selling papers.

    Just look at the recent case by comparison of Aleshia McPhail, yes I know found and someone arrested within hours. No Gamble? No missing people? no Charities jumping on the passing bandwagon and no political gain. Is this post McCann or post Leveson?

    So that bitter-sweet taste of eleven years of the make-believe world of leaving three children, for four evenings, in an unlocked apartment should be where it should have been from the start. What the F* were these people thinking. All nine of them!

    The best thing Mrs May, the present government can do it stop the funding that fuels the concept, that all is right in the world if you can 'name' it. The only name for Neglect is neglect, except under Blair et al they tried to alter it. Gamble's report was commission & submitted under Blair\Brown ......... bla bla the rest is history.

    I would have thought with a staggering 90 murders in London todate this year, the police had more pressing & urgent matters than a child missing eleven years ago.

    What's that saying something about 'polishing a turd' or aka good PR - (rofl can never say\type\think 'PR' without thinking per rectum)

    RIP Madeleine, April & Aleshia just to name (a few) of the little ones.

    1. Forgive me for not responding to your post 07:28, it is full of points of interest, first of which, I note you are a psychiatric nurse, as was my beloved Dad. He had all 'the tickets', which I am sure you will understand. I think psychiatric nursing gives an insight into abnormal behaviour, that has chillingly close parallels to 'normal' behaviour. My dear old dad was way ahead of his time, and I am sure you are too. Your point 'post McCann or post Leveson' is quite brilliant. Would add, where was CEOP and all the fundraisers when Shannon Matthews went missing? They were at the side of Gerry and Kate within 48 hours.

      As for the continued funding. I think those responsible for making Madeleine disappear, must be chilled to the bone every time OP announce they have received further funding. Effectively they are still and always will be on the hook. Look how happy Gerry and Kate were when the original investigation was shelved and they were released from arguido status. See 'Expresso' interview, it is quite an eye opener.

      However, if OG thought the fear factor would cause suspects to crack, they should accept now that isn't going to happen. But of course, as you rightly point out, bringing a prosecution for a crime that was committed in Portugal isn't Scotland Yard's prerogative. I suspect Operation Grange is now only a skeleton staff waiting to hear from Portugal.

      There is of course plenty of other crime that these remaining officers could be working on, and perhaps they are. Unfortunately no member of parliament or MSM journalist will call out this 'waste of money', because it is such an emotive subject, a little girl is missing, money should be no object.

      Anyway, thank you for your interesting post 07:28

  5. @ 28th July 15.29

    To be fair she did say she was mad along with everyone else who doubts the McCann's lol.
    No seriously, I am not sure if the post means there was indeed a cover up,but it wasnt the McCann's who seemed to have the government over a barrel.
    It was Tony Blair who decided it was convenient for them to be innocent so ordered that to be the case.
    I dont entirely go along with that actually although maybe in part as it could have suited both parties.
    I still think the McCanns had some hold or other over the government ( or maybe even a higher authority).
    How or what is key to the mystery in my view.

    1. How does the McCanns holding something over the government sway the PJ,if theres evidence of involvement in Madeleines disappearance then why does Strange hold it rather than the PJ?
      I think its more of a colonial thing,the brit cops were going over to solve it cause the port swilling sardine munching pj weren't capable,SY now have a massive omelette covering their faces and its them on hands and knees to the HO for funding to cover their embarrassment.Maybe old Dick won't go grovelling what with all the travails of stopping the killings in London at the moment
      The PJ all but solved it in 2007 but its hard evidence and that alone which is the stumbling block.
      My view on it any way.

    2. @ H 29th July 10:42

      I think you may have inadvertently answered your own point.
      The UK probably sees themselves as rather superior to Portugal and likewise the respective police forces.
      Rather arrogant but there you go, probably untrue too,yet old habits die hard.
      And wasn't undue pressure applied by the UK to remove the lead portuguese detective? ( we assume anyway).
      So, ultimately who has more clout,the UK government (and SY) or the Portuguese government ( and PJ)?
      But anyway you are correct the PJ did all but solve it back in 2007 and yes it was a lack of hard evidence, although didn't some forensic evidence get destroyed in the UK before it could be subject to a second opinion? Who ordered that I wonder?

    3. That's a pretty hard view 10:42, and one I have often held myself. Gerry's 'there's no evidence' taunts more than Goncalo Amaral, I am sure.

      But then I wonder why Operation Grange continues, albeit, with a much smaller team and less finance. What is the point?

      They seem to have enough evidence to be granted further funding each time they ask, but not enough evidence to prosecute anyone. Why then do they continue? Why will they not give the parents closure?

    4. Anon @ 12:15.
      Regarding the forensics could it be just incompetence that it got destroyed,wasn't that particular lab closed because of money issues.
      On to Strange,I've long said and I'll repeat again,it'll close along the lines of person/persons unknown removed Madeleine from 5a without leaving a trace to here whereabout's.Rowley all but confirmed as much in his last statement saying they had no definitive evidence if the girl was dead or alive.

      Some one somewhere one would expect it to answer why its cost £11 million and counting with no outcome,but there again would it be of no surprise if it didn't happen.

      Was it ever confirmed that the last tranche of monies was being spent solely for a supposed search or is it just as likely to be wages and the officers working elsewhere but on retainer to Strange through HO funding just in case something were to come up.

      Probably wide of the mark but hey oh!


    5. Nothing to do with having enough evidence. It continues because a line (or lines) of investigation has (have) not been concluded.

    6. @ H
      I agree with you and like you, have done for a long time, that Strange will end along the lines of probably abducted by person or persons unknown.

      By the way are you the guy that came up with the name Strange?
      If so, well done, I use it all the time now. Simple but effective. Why didn't I think of it

    7. anon @ 11:22,yep it was I who mentioned strange,got to have a bit of notoriety.
      I don't think abduction will be mentioned, to do that they would know by what egress, how many involved, mode of transport away, destination …………..

      anon @ 10:01,its been like that for some time,the line/lines must stretch around the world its taking that long.

    8. @ Anonymous30 July 2018 at 08:56

      No forensics were destroyed.

    9. At another place ( I know hated by most here) there is an interesting thread that may or may not be relevant to why the Mccanns might have had leverage over the government.
      Apparently Gerry Mccann was a team doctor at Celtic football club during a period in the late nineties and at the moment several coaches and other staff members are in court now or soon to be on abuse charges for around that time period.
      Could ( big could) Gerry have known about that and threatened to expose them in May 2007?
      John Reid was also connected to Celtic at that time and was later home secretary.
      Interesting if nothing else and a more simple explanation than some of the more fanciful theories.

    10. As a follow up to my post,something has just occurred to me.
      All hypothetical of course, but are the decks being cleared and Strange is not Strange at all and is in fact Grange and genuine.
      Just a thought over my morning tea lol.

    11. Hi Anon @ 8:24
      It was I who named it strange mainly on the back of the digs,what led SY to such a folly,was it strong intel? that led them to believe that the remains of the girl were buried there if that's the case then it was flawed but who ever supplied it wasn't charged with wasting police time,was it therefore done on a whim after supposedly gleaming it from the files which no one else did. Then they interviewed persons of interest afterwards so it never came from them.Tis strange after all.
      I've never doubted it was genuine,just that they limited themselves to an abduction,to which they can't find and this is where their sticking point is how to extract themselves.

    12. @ H
      If Gerry Mccann did know about any alleged abuse at Celtic and now those alleged perpetrators are indeed being charged, albeit years later, then any protection that knowledge might have brought,is now useless. And that it what I meant by clearing the decks.
      Grange can now act.
      If all the above is true of course,but I think it is interesting nonetheless.

    13. @ Anonymous1 August 2018 at 13:38

      you come straight from the cesspit don't you.

    14. @ 22:21
      No, never been a member. I do look into most places though to see if there is any thing new or anything catches my attention.

  6. "Sat 28 Oct 2006 00.12 BST
    One evening in 1988, a man broke into a house in Canterbury. He awoke an 11-year-old girl in her bed and raped her, threatening her with a knife if she screamed. He then indecently assaulted her nine-year-old sister. Earlier, their mother had left home to work a night shift for the first time. After the attacks, the girls ran in tears to their mother's workplace.

    For 13 years the case remained unsolved. Then in March 2001, John Wood, a 59-year-old man with previous convictions for sex offences, was arrested for shoplifting in Derby. Detectives took his mouth swab and checked it against the national DNA database of more than 5,000 unsolved crimes. They found it matched semen on sheets preserved after the attacks on the two sisters. In June that year Wood pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 15 years' imprisonment. After his conviction, the mother said: "I don't know how we've coped as a family and how we got through it, but we felt he would never be caught."

    This was no doubt just the kind of case Tony Blair had in mind when he visited the Forensic Science Service's London headquarters this week and eulogised the DNA Database as a crime-busting tool. He called for the national DNA database to be expanded to include every citizen. While at the centre, he heard how advances in DNA technology are not only boosting detection rates in current cases but also helping police in reviews of so-called cold cases - some several decades old - where there was no new evidence."

    Note the date - well before the Mccann case.

    1. As I said to another poster who made similar observations, Blair's dreams of a national DNA database may have been sidelined by more pressing matters but it never went away.

      The example of the cold case that was solved 13 years on, is a good example of the benefits of a database, but does it justify the taking of EVERYONE's DNA? It comes under the 'one person's done something wrong so everyone must suffer' school of thought. How many DNA samples did they take before they stumbled on Mr. John Wood? Over 13 years I'm guessing million. Ergo, finding Mr. Johan Wood was almost as random as finding him on a traffic check.

      Selling the idea of ID cards to a democratic society is an almost impossible task. No-one wants to see people harassed for not having the right 'papers' on them. The only option is to sell them as protection. By persuading the British public that they are in constant danger from terrorists and paedophiles.

      The Madeleine case highlighted the dangers of paedophiles, they are everywhere according to Jim Gamble, disguised as ordinary people. Where children are concerned, we act first and think later, giving up our freedoms to protect kids is a no brainer. Or at least that is what those promoting the dangers are hoping.

  7. "Initial attempts to introduce a voluntary identity card were made under the Conservative administration of John Major, under the then Home Secretary Michael Howard."

    "In 2003, Blunkett announced that the government intended to introduce a "British national identity card" linked to a national identity database, the National Identity Register. The proposals were included in the November 2003 Queen's Speech"

    "The Identity Cards Bill was included in the Queen's Speech on 23 November 2004, and introduced to the House of Commons on 29 November."

    "The Bill received Royal Assent on 30 March 2006."

    Note the dates and how long the matter was before parliament. Well before the Mccann case.

    1. The question of national identity cards has been around for decades, it resurfaces at opportune moments, whenever there are terrorist attacks for example.

      Unfortunately, Blair's war on terror was more like war on the British people, we were already seeing examples of Blair cracking down on dissidents, eg. the elderly protesters at the Labour Party conference, and the forced removal of Walter Wolfgang in 2005. And of course some might say the bombings on 7/7/2005 were a direct result of Tony Blair's taking us into an illegal war.

      ID cards were never going to be popular. Some argue they would keep us safer, others that they are a huge infringement on our personal freedom. I'm the latter. There is something a tad fascist in the authorities demanding the right to see our ID's at will.

      I note the difference in the dates, but you should also note that I said the Madeleine case arrived like mana from Heaven for those pushing for ID cards and a national DNA databank. Theoretically, a national database would speed up police work and protect children. Those who think it is a good idea, should perhaps have a brief look at the history of these systems, or at the very least, read George Orwell's 1984.

    2. I have no problem with my DNA being taken and stored. Neither do I have any issue with ID card - have you ever tried to sign up for something and they want, WHAT ... Utility bills PMSL... Besides, say a driving licence, a passport, birth & marriage certificate etc. But do love the idea of ID proven in the 21st century, by your bloody gas bill!

    3. Kudos to you on being one of the civilly obedient masses 09:11, but I would suggest you study a little history before so casually handing over your freedoms. Presumably you are not an immigrant or a member of any ethnic or minority group. You identify with one gender and are confident in your sexual orientation.

      The problem with being part of the safe and protected majority, is that the paradigm changes, not as frequently and often as we might expect but enough to change the dominant ideology. Who would have thought 20 years ago for example, that the poor and disabled would be victimised as they are now? Something that was once taboo, is now mainstream. A simple change in government or government policy, could find you, 09:11, among the subversives.

      Your last line works well, as a cheap gag, but I would much prefer to produce a gas bill as ID, than stand by and see all the freedoms our predecessors fought so hard for, given up in so cavalier a manner.

      A database enables users to target specific demographics, it is standard marketing practice. If a sitting government held EVERYTHING, they could stay in power forever. They could, and already do, point the finger at vulnerable groups to take the blame for their incompetence. First they came for the Jews, then the communists etc.

      As I type this, all my old Orwellian fears have already become manifest, and with a few advances. However, the rebel in me will always refuse to stand in the sheep dip line.

  8. 18 June 2004

    Biometrics - great hope for world security or triumph for Big Brother?

    "British police will almost certainly be given access in the near future to US intelligence databases containing DNA samples, fingerprints and digital images of thousands of foreign nationals seized around the world by the US as terror suspects.

    As the war on terror increasingly comes to rely on biometric technology - the use of physical characteristics unique to individuals such as iris pattern, DNA and fingerprints to verify identify - western police and intelligence agencies are drawing up plans for sophisticated biometric databases which would allow them to share sensitive information."


    The FBI, which has more than 75m fingerprints on its criminal and civil computer records, is adding biometric details from suspects detained in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

    "We are obtaining DNA from terrorists around the world as we encounter them," Mr Kirkpatrick said. "We have set up a terrorist screening centre. In Iraq, the high value detainees are having DNA samples, fingerprints and digital photographs taken. The numbers involved are in the thousands. We are doing it wherever it's appropriate, wherever there's a threat to the USA."


    "Ian Brown, director of the Foundation for Information Policy Research said: "British police are very much moving towards a model in which they obtain as much data, biometric or otherwise, on individuals and share it as widely as possible. The danger is that information about British citizens will be shared with the Americans and there are very few safeguards on how this can be used by the US authorities who have a very different idea to privacy and data protection from us."

  9. "That was Myth One. If that wasn’t enough to send anxious parents scuttling to have their babies DNA stored and tracking chips planted under their skin, it was supported by Myth Two. There are thousands of pedophiles, disguised as normal people, lurking in our midst."

    For someone who seems determined to pass themselves off as a bit of an expert, you really are clueless. You speak as if paedophiles are a different species. Most of them are otherwise 'normal' people, living otherwise 'normal' lives, as teachers, butchers, bakers, candlestick makers. They exist in every profession and every socio-economic group. Their victims are usually children close to them.

    So why do you keep claiming that this is a myth?

    1. Anonymous 29 July at 22:52
      ("Most of them are otherwise 'normal' people, living otherwise 'normal' lives, as teachers, butchers, bakers, candlestick makers. They exist in every profession and every socio-economic group.")

      From 'expert' Jim Gamble:

      "Special Constables, uniformed citizen volunteers walk the streets of our towns and villages every week. Their presence deters offenders, makes people safer and critically makes them feel safer. There is no reason they cannot patrol the online spaces. The volunteer butcher, baker or candlestick maker can be trained to seek out these abusers, to identify, locate and lure them to a place where the police arrest them."

    2. The idea that there are thousands of paedophiles living and working among us, reminds me of the cold war scares, 'Reds under the Beds' 'Invasion of the body snatchers' and all that. True, it is a much creepier form of 'divide and rule' but it appeals to those who see paedo hunting as a sport. For the visual, just watch a video of a paedophile cornered in a car park.

      Citing, the butcher, baker and candlestick maker, shows you know absolutely nothing about paedophile behaviour, both you and Jim Gamble. There is quite a clear list of professions that active paedophiles are drawn to, and they usually involve working with vulnerable children. Top of the list would be priests, mentors, child care and child protection, boy scout leaders, choir masters, football coaches etc. They are not making sausages and baking bread.

      Citing every profession is either disingenuous or unbelievably ignorant, whatever, it is being used to heighten the fear factor. Nothing more. The most effective way to protect children from abuse would be to put more social workers on the front line, and to offer more support to struggling families.

      The idea of giving Jim Gamble his own private internet army, is horrendous. The owners of the social networks have already refused to give in to his demands. Quite rightly. The internet is for everyone, to use as they wish, no-one wants his kind of policing. Should one of Jim’s minions decide to patrol my blog, they will be told to naff off. Not believing Jim Gambles crazy ideas on child protection is not a criminal offence, no matter how much some want it to be.

    3. I find it difficult to understand how a seemingly intelligent woman can be so ignorant.

      I suggest you read this

      "Operation Yewtree's horrendous revelations have begun to indicate the true scale of sexual abuse of children in the UK. Best estimates for the number of paedophiles in Britain today place it at a staggering 250,000, with some studies suggesting that 1 percent of all men could experience sexual feelings towards minors."

      This data isn't just picked from thin air; you need to educate yourself, Ros, because your ignorance is scary in someone who writes about child abuse yet seemingly doesn't know anything about it and certainly doesn't understand it

    4. Best estimates are a staggering 250,000 eh? You suggest the date isn't just picked from thin air. Ok, where does the data come from? Victims? Arrests? Using a sample demographic? Please do inform me.

      You must surely concede that butchers, bakers and candlestick makers can largely be taken out of the equation. Active paedophiles work in environments where they have access to children. That's why the childrens homes of the 60's and 70's were full of them.

      If you don't know what professions paedophiles are drawn to, then it is your ignorance that is scary.

      If you truly cared about children being abused, not just sexually, you would be fighting for more resources to be ploughed into the frontline services. More social workers, more family support, more education. Teach parents how to protect their children, and teach children how to protect themselves. The idea of stopping child abuse via online chat rooms etc, is absurd, and does nothing to assist kids going home to an empty fridge and maybe another beating.

      However, taking your figure of 250,000 for paedophiles, lets try to imagine a figure for violent bullies. Physical abuse against children is far more prevalent than sexual abuse, times 5 I would say to get a rough estimate. That means, there are 1,250,000 potential murderers and violent criminals. But I suppose tracking down parents and carers who beat their kids, is less headline grabbing than creepy sex crimes.

      Anyway, look forward to hearing where those stats come from.

    5. Actually you are both right...the paedophiles that worked in childrens homes...scout groups etc were the gatekeepers and pimps for the other paedophiles in their network(the butcher,baker,political matchmaker). By all means mainly childrens homes were targeted but were used by other walks of society. As allegedly witnessed at areas such as dolphin square were the gatekeepers pimped their charges out.

  10. Good job the MET are on the case of Madeleine,they're wasted in London.

    "'Murderer' who molested and strangled a girl, 10, in her bed may never be caught after bungling police wrote off her death as an accident
    Investigation finds person who molested and strangled girl may never be caught
    A post-mortem examination found cause of death was compression of the neck
    But the Metropolitan Police dismissed the child's death in 2016 as an accident
    Two people - boy, 12, and a man, 42, were arrested on suspicion of murder but no criminal charges have ever been brought in relation to the girl's death
    Now an investigation into how detectives looked into the case found 13 failings"

  11. Using "MADELEINE'S DISAPPEARANCE" in the title of you blog just shows how desperate you are to attract viewers.

    The Mccann case had nothing whatsoever to do with your pet hates: Tony Blair, New Labour, ID cards, DNA database, Gamble and CEOP, paedophile hunters, freedom of speech etc etc etc.

    The Mccanns have not made any difference to any Government policies as my earlier posts at 29 July 2018 at 10:38 and 29 July 2018 at 10:43 and your replies show.

    The Mccanns have a missing child - you should not include "MADELEINE" in the title of your blog just to attract hits and comments.

    Try your hate everything blog again without "MADELEINE" in the title then maybe some idiot will really believe that you are weaning yourself off the Mccanns.

    (saved in case you put it in your trash)

    1. Jun 16, 2007

      'Kate and Gerry McCann are said to be alarmed that child trafficking is not taken seriously enough. Kate, 38, is now considering leaving her job as a GP to campaign full-time. A family friend said: "They have come to realize that this is a major issue. If they can act as figureheads then that's all well and good." Her plans come after meeting child welfare groups and politicians on trips to European capitals.'


      'John McCann, Madeleine's uncle, said: "We are at the stage where we're feeling comfortable about broadening the issue. Criminal abductions of children are happening fairly regularly across the world. It's horrible. It's a political issue that's low on the agenda but should be higher."'

      "It's a political issue..."

    2. I am grateful to those who still look in on my blog, but I am not 'desperate' lol. You keep applying emotive words that bear no resemblance to reality.

      I have a large audience who, like myself, have followed this case for many years. It is only courtesy that I keep them updated, it is the polite thing to do.

      You see, Gerry and Kate not only wanted to cover up the circumstances of their daughter's disappearance, they also wanted to gag the press, while at the same time enjoying the freedom to demonise Goncalo Amaral and the Portuguese police.

      Their efforts to gag the press have, on the whole, been very effective. The tabloids are still pushing the press releases of Team McCann and treating them as the victims of a third world justice system.

      Readers come to me because I cut straight through Team McCann's propaganda - I tell it as it is. Even with Carter Ruck they are unable to silence independents like myself. You can scream all you like that this is a 'hate' blog, but within moments any reasonable person can see that it isn't. Questioning a frankly unbelievable abduction story isn't hate. Nor is questioning a former Prime Minister for taking us into an illegal war. The McCanns want the power to take that freedom away from us, that's why they have enemies. All their legal actions have lost them multitudes of followers.

    3. If child trafficking is so prevalent, how come there have been no arrests for it in 11 years? Especially as the police forces of two countries have live investigations?

      Criminal abductions of children are happening fairly regularly across the world, said John McCann, spreading the fear. Actually no they are not. They are as rare and as random as they ever were. See Wiki list of kidnappings.

      It's a political issue, is probably the most truthful part of John McCann's statement.

    4. Suggest you read this, Roz

    5. They are projecting figures for a hidden crime 20:14, it's a guess, not even an educated one.

      Like many I have watched in horror as the children of immigrants were stolen from the parents at the Mexican border. The reason given, in most cases, were that they believe the children were being trafficked or kidnapped. It was a pathetic excuse obviously, but it does make one wonder if trafficking figures are bumped for nefarious reasons. Particularly by those who are keen to have stricter border controls.

      What of all the little mites with their parents struggling to escape war torn countries. How many of them are 'lost' at sea, on the beach, or in the system? Or are they among the children we don't mention, the ones excluded when the sanctimonious shout 'think of the children'.

      The reality is there are many children in 'clear and present danger' and a task force of police officers glued to their laptops for months and years on end does nothing whatsoever to assist them.

    6. "They are projecting figures for a hidden crime 20:14, it's a guess, not even an educated one."

      But your guess counts far more than the NSPCC - that figures!

  12. Hi Anon 29 July 2018 at 22:52

    Here're just some thoughts about how we look or should look upon criminals in general and some also thoughts about our integrity, which you didn't discuss.

    Many presumptuous criminals live seemingly normal lives. So, of course we have people living among us, who’re capable of committing sexual offenses against children and all kinds of crimes. However, most of them become defined as criminals only after they’ve been caught. This, of course, applies to all categories of people, who are prone to breaking the law and who do so before anyone sees or suspects anything.

    I must say, that I find it hard to believe, that there would be more potential paedophiles hiding among us than other categories of criminals. Why would it be so?

    So, if you as a parent live in fear of paedophiles, you should logically be just as concerned about all other crimes that you and your family may become victims of, but cannot foresee.

    If society would succeed in getting us to agree to stricter legislation for sexual offenses and to more monitoring of presumptuous paedophiles, then we’ll eventually be “guided” by the “Authority” and all legislation will, mildly expressed, become inhumane.

    What’s so horrible about increased surveillance is that it almost always affects 99.99% of completely innocent and law-abiding citizens, who’ve become persuaded or even manipulated by our politicians to give up their integrity. We must never forget that our whole sense of integrity is the very basis of the freedom we as human beings need to live a decent life. Finally, here’s a quote by Benjamin Franklin to support what I’ve tried to say.

    “Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security”

    1. Good point Bjorn! If we are surrounded by paedophiles, what's to say we are not also surrounded by thieves and murderers. It's a wonder we dare venture outside our front doors!

      Punishing the many for the sake of the few is pretty textbook stuff for wannabe dictators, history is scattered with examples. Should a movie cause one fan to go on a rampage, it should be banned for everyone, including the 5 million who saw it and didn't go on a rampage. It's incredible that anyone still buys this narrow minded thinking, but sadly, some still do.

      Those so willing to give up their freedoms without a second thought, have one moment of glory. 'Hey look at me folks, I'm clean as a whistle, I have nothing to hide'. Not that anyone cares, and the goody two shoes status only lasts until the next shift in the paradigm.

      I once got stranded at Palma airport in Majorca. It was my own fault, I had bought cheap flights from a bucket shop on Tottenham Court Road, no-one to blame, I was told by the smug Brits who surrounded me. They have bought their flights via the legitimate, accepted route, that's why they flying home and I wasn't. Foreigners meanwhile, stuffed money in my hands and the hands of my small son. Not a great idea, I had to tip him upside down to retrieve it.

      Several moments later however, the smug Brits were approached by an airline official with the same news he had given me an hour earlier. Their legitimately purchased tickets were also worthless. And yes, I had a little chuckle.

      The quote from Benjamin Franklin couldn't be more apt!

    2. Hello Rosalinda and thanks for comments on my thoughts

      I have always believed that Man is good by nature, though some people unfortunately become awfully bad and evil due to social and economic circumstances. Good and decent people, like all the ones that I met, when I as a teenager, hitchhiked around in the UK in the 60s, are unfortunately sometimes very naive and tend to believe that state control of our privacy does not affect us negatively, if we only strive to live legally, but, as George Orwell tried to explain to us 70 years ago in his “1984”, it certainly does.

      Since then, people in many totalitarian states have paid a high price for their credulity. People who still argue that a few more surveillance cameras in public areas and a little more censorship on internet are needed for law and order, and then claim that it won’t harm anyone, should at least get to know someone who lived in the Baltic States or in any other eastern European state during the cold war. They would then see things differently.

    3. Many I think are smug in the knowledge that they are part of the majority, the civilly obedient who believe they will never have anything to fear from the authorities.

      Already in the UK we are seeing decent, law abiding, citizens from Windrush being deported back to countries they haven't lived in for a lifetime. I sometimes wonder if those so keen to crack down on immigration have any understanding at all of the utter cruelty involved.

      Anyone with any knowledge of history will understand that ID, or 'papers' as they were called when rounding up Jews for the gas chambers, gathering information on the population never ends well.

      At the moment you have Trump rounding up Mexicans under the guise that wanting to start a new life in a land of opportunity is illegal. Wtf? Why can't people understand that immigrants bump start an economy. In the 1960's Australia were encouraging immigrants to come and start new lives in Australia.

      Trump has made Mexicans the enemy, probably because he has never had a meal at Mar-a-largo that hasn't been spat on. First comes 'the papers', then the detention camps. That's how Hitler started, and when the detention camps became too full, he and his cabal of evil came up with the Final Solution.

      The wise words of German Pastor Martin Niemoller should be borne in mind by those who think it is only the subversives who have something to protest:

      'First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.

      Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

      Then they came for Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

      Then they came for me, and there was no-one left to speak for me.'

    4. What you need to remember about immigration is how the Indigenous peoples of the Americas suffered/suffer along with the Aboriginals, Maoris etc its not all sweetness and light.

  13. Sonia Poulton
    ‏Jun 29

    Our next film 'Paedophiles in Parliament' is well into production. The latest update has just gone live on @Patreon:

    Do you feature in this Ros?

    1. @ Ros22:48

      You were featured in her last film so I just wondered if you would be in this as well.

  14. Reverend T. Ben Nit1 August 2018 at 14:34

    Good God!

    Jane Cook has showed up again.
    At Textusa's ???
    Has she no shame???
    The wrath of God will surely come to those who turn to the dark side. Well, grey side anyway.
    Amen to that!

  15. @14:34


    In the name of Jesus, I’m dying, Reverend,… to know who Jane Cook is.


  16. 16:05.
    She used to post here in the ziggy days and left after some rows with Blacksmith.

    1. Anonymous 1 August 2018 at 18:39

      Thank you. I understand.

      “…the ziggy days…”

      Oh yes! Those were the days! The days of the Rising Sun. Any info as to his absence?


    2. I tend to think with all that anger, he has spontaneously combusted T - nothing left but his boots! :(

      I'm tempted to describe him as an angry young man, but I am sure he is over 60. In any case, he had reached the stage of cardies, slippers and writing Mr. Angry letters to local newspapers and Councils. I remember my dad going through that state, he thought it enough to write one or two poignant lines and sign off with an exclamation mark!

      Sadly for Ziggy his powers of persuasion were not as effective as he would have liked when posting here. He failed to change my mind on anything, I don't know if he persuaded anyone actually.

      To be fair, for him it was always going to be an uphill struggle. The evidence of the dogs may not be admissible in Court (I think it is)but it cost the McCanns tens if not hundreds, of thousands of supporters. Crimewatch polished off a few more, and the failure of anyone to find an abductor in 11 years, finished off the rest And that is without mentioning the parents' vindictive legal campaign to financially wipe out the detective who searched for their daughter.

      But, fair dues to Ziggy, he was tenacious. I'm glad I didn't ban him - though I might have and he just came back under a different name, lol. He is free to post here whenever he likes T, if he ever pops in.

      Thank you for remembering my birthday T. Birthdays of course, bring back floods of memories. My best ever was about 6 years old. We lived in a big house in Virginia Water and I had a party with all my friends, but all I really wanted was my Dad. He hadn't returned from work, and I couldn't stop looking out for him. To my delight, I saw over the top of what must have a 6ft fence, the head of giant cartoon giraffe strolling along! Then my dad appeared holding said giant, blow up giraffe under one arm and a giant parcel under the other! I was ecstatic! The giraffe didn't really do anything, but it was big! The parcel contained a box that contained the most beautiful doll I had ever seen. Sadly, she didn't stay beautiful for long, I cut off her golden locks so she resembled myself. I was still sporting a tuft on the top of my head that seemed only to grow upwards. The result of an impromptu haircut given to me by my big brother. Now I have gone all melancholy, because I wrecked the doll and the giraffe shrank!

      But, I jest. I doubt we will see Ziggy again, because, well he has used up all the defences he had, and now we are just going round in circles. Those who believe the McCanns as intensely as he does, will probably carry on doing so, no matter what the outcome. Ziggy I still think, is member of the inner circle. Perhaps Michael Wright or Jon Corner. He is, imo, working class, now professional, semi educated but his education is stunted by his pre-conceived ideas and system of beliefs. He doesn't venture out of his comfort zone, he gets lost and becomes hostile.

      For me, as a single woman who's knocking on a bit, I have a habit of profiling people, men especially, lol, based on their online behaviour. It makes me feel good about all the reasons I had for remaining single. Hold onto your seats you are in for some waffle, lol

    3. Had I ever lived with, or god forbid, been married to, Ziggy, he would have been despatched with an ice pick and buried under the patio years ago!

      It astonishes actually, how many middle aged couples remain married in homes that remain intact. But then again, my experience is based on having to call out the police and ambulance services for rowdy games of trivial pursuit. Which brings to mind the great 'Avon Calling' question circa 1992, what did the Avon lady actually say? Not that important in the whole scheme of things, but it escalated to include and divide neighbours and emergency services. Families took opposite sides, swords were drawn (quite literally).

      But I jest. As irritating as men are, and they are, some still have the ability, to sound, and act, as if they are more intelligent or educated than I. And, lol, I know how crazy (and arrogant)that sounds and how terrifying it is to the opposite sex! I admire, only those I can look up to,and sadly, that is very few.

      Happily, that is not entirely true. I spent a good few years of my life besotted with a man, simply because he could make me laugh. We spent 15+ years knocking 7 bells out of each other, which was a lot of fun, but exhausting, and my venture into higher education, taught me that I was much better than that. Must be said however, that it was that ability to make me laugh that saved him from ending up under the patio!

      I was heartbroken recently at the death of Anthony Bourdain. The dear man was charm personified. True, I usually lean towards the 'Bertie Wooster', but Anthony with his moped, his open shirt, his earing and his embrace of everything different, made me want to say 'I do', even to a dip in frozen ice, but most especially to a herb laden pizza. On his trip to Russia he experienced not only the beetroot laden food, the ice dips and a trip to the Winter Palace, he also knew the history of Catherine the Great! To the end of my days I will mourn his loss.

      Men like Ziggy, should be and probably are married. Imo, to likely saints, or at least women who have thus far staved off the desire to grab an icepick. As a legal secretary I did several stints in Matrimonial Law - and yeh, it is as much fun as it sounds. When love turns to hate, there are no depths to which either party will go. To be fair, in the UK at least, without guns, the parties aim straight for the gutter. I remember one lawyer's wife, wanting to be kept in the manner to which she had become accustomed, demanding £35k per year for cosmetics alone. My first thoughts as a secretary who didn't even earn half that much, was 'Jeez, how pig ugly you gotta to be to need £35k of cosmetics - every year'. But I digress. Relationships can and do get very ugly.

      My ideal man would have an inquisitive mind, just like mine, always on a quest for knowledge. He will never, ever, say, that's it, I know all the answers, lol. For me, education has always revealed just how little I actually do know. And I have no problem with that. I want to learn, I want to open a few more doors.

      One day we will meet, my dear T. Maybe a beer by a river, or a stroll around an art gallery. Thank you for staying with me, and my blog, I am blessed to have such nice people who take the time out to interact, it's a busy old world, and I truly do know how precious time is, thank you T and take care.

    4. In case, no-one guessed, I have indeed partaken of the falling down water. Technically, I am still celebrating my birthday hic. Fortunately for you all, I have no means to sing to you, or you would surely get a very painful rendition of Flower of Scotland or Danny Boy. Possibly, 'The Red Flag' which I stuck to the back of my toilet door in 1989 so I could learn all the words.

      More likely you would 'Honky Tonk Angels by Kitty Kelly. I am going to a karaoke on Saturday and still undecided on what to torture the pub crowd with. I discovered some time ago that I can't sing. I actually paid for a very painful hour long lesson with a professional, but within 10 minutes I knew I was kidding myself. The gasping for breath sound of Billy Holliday and the cat being throttled by Kate Bush had pretty much cornered the market. The unique agonising sounds coming from my gob were not much use to anyone. I have no idea why, underwater, I sound exactly like Maria Callas, how does no-one else hear that?

      Anyway, I will go alone, sit quietly in the corner and applaud all those brave enough to get up and sing. I will suppress any thoughts of Gladys Knight and the Pips, Gloria Gayner and Dusty Springfield. I'm leaning more towards 'All that Jazz' - somebody stop me!

      If I go, it will be my first night out in forever, watch this space!

  17. Hi Rosalinda,
    Here's a 10th of September 2007 quote from Chief inspector Tavares De Almeida. The Coordinator of the Praia Da Luz criminal investigation.
    "We conclude that the minor Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort on May 3rd 2007.
    A simulation of a kidnapping was performed.
    Kate and Gerry McCann are involved in the occultation (Translation; Merriam Webster dictionary,- The state of being hidden from view) ...of the cadaver of their child Madeleine".

    Here's a case so simple it was solved by the savvy Portuguese police 11 years ago.

    Will the English police operation "Grange" do better than that. Unlikely.

    But if nothing else - at least an OBE should be awarded by the Queen to Mrs McCann for working so tirelessly as a director of the Missing Children's fund.

    1. Many thanks JC, we need reminding of the Interim report every now and then, so see the investigation of this case went so drastically wrong. Who persuaded the Portuguese to remove Goncalo Amaral from the case? Just as he was arranging for members of the Smith family to return to Portugal to make statements.

    2. Hi jc August 2018 at 03:17

      As far as the Portuguese detective work is concerned, the case was actually resolved by Portuguese PJ more than a decade ago,as you say, but unfortunately, the legal part of the case has not yet been fully completed.

      The reason as to why the PJ have been so reluctant to address the real case ( that is the suspicion about the McCanns’ involvement), and chosen to subordinate themselves to British authorities, remains a mystery, but it explains why so little progress have been made.

      It’s quite reasonable to assume that the on-going investigation, though it is said to be a police cooperation between two police forces on equal terms, has been in the hands of the S Y since the Operation Grange was set up, while the Portuguese PJ have all the time acted as their little helper. That’s how it must have been, as far as I can see.

      If the Operation Grange after more than 5 years of hard work, whether they’ve been investigating the McCanns or just randomly or systematically have been looking for potential suspects otherwise and elsewhere, haven’t found anything that supports the McCanns’ claims about a stranger abduction, such a “failure” in itself, if this would be the case, does in fact constitute additional circumstantial evidence , which even clearer than 11 years ago suggest that anything but an abduction must have happened. I’m therefore so excited to hear about what the OG havn’t found, as that might eventually help the PJ to solve the case

  18. "Ex-detective claims he knows NAME of hired assassin who killed Jill Dando - as man wrongfully locked up for 1999 murder tells of eight-year jail ordeal"

    "Mr Williams-Thomas said: 'I have now been given the name of the killer and that is my focus - on that individual.'

    Shocked at the claim, presenter Ruth Langsford asked: 'You have a name?'

    Mr Williams-Thomas responded: 'I do. And that is my focus now - to try and finally solve this investigation because there is no doubt that Jill was murdered, assassinated, by a professional hit-man.'"


    So he has come on tv to disclose that he is going to tell the police the name of an assassin, an assassin who has in his opinion already murdered a few.. not the best thing to do!!..sleep well eye open and all that!!.

    Well if this chap knows the name of the killer why tell the world about it. The Hit Man could knock the Journalist off. Things like that should only be told to the police.

    1. He is a dark horse that Mark Williams-Thomas, he has the desperate look of a Dickensian villain who has found a way to profit from the suffering of others.

      I tend to think his reputation as a criminologist springs from his own ability to market himself. His take on the Madeleine case is among the more bizarre. Madeleine he believes wandered out of the apartment and was taken by a opportunist predator. His explanation didn't go down well with the McCanns who were still pushing the open window and the fact that Madeleine was too small to have opened it or made her way out of the patio doors and the gates on the stairs. Why MWT threw his weird theory into the mix, is anyone's guess.

    2. In regard to Mark Williams-Thomas I used to respect the guy until it dawned on me that he only really cares about scraping a living through his TV career. He's an opportunist and familes looking for hope will hang on his every word. I just hope for their sake he does not bring them false hope and endure their pain.

  19. I find it very strange that someone who objects to ID cards is willing to publish every detail of their personal life in a book and online.

    1. It is a matter of principle. That I share personal details in a book or online, is my prerogative. I don't share my medical records or my bank statements, yet all these details will be shared with hundreds, if not thousands of civil servants and jobsworths.

      Again, I suggest you look at the way ID cards have been used in the past. It is the first step towards martial law.

    2. It is indeed a step towards martial law. Good to see at least some of Zigster's wisdom sank into you .

  20. "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton31 July 2018 at 08:32

    Good point Bjorn! If we are surrounded by paedophiles, what's to say we are not also surrounded by thieves and murderers."

    Where do you think they live Ros - on some island somewhere and they get a ferry to do their deeds? They live in the community.

  21. Two women a week in the UK are killed by partners or former partners. In more than 75% of cases of child murder the culprit is a parent or quasi-parent. Most paedophiles do ordinary jobs and abuse the children who are near and available to them.
    This is all confirmed by evidence, freely available.

    But Ros knows better.

    In fact, Ros, characterising paedophiles as you do puts children at greater risk. I’ve no objection to your being stupid, but I do wish you would keep your stupid to yourself.

    1. No, most active paedophiles do not do ordinary jobs, they choose jobs where they have access to children. Childrens Homes were full of them, so too all forms of child protection. Try asking a few careleavers.

      I demolished your butcher, baker, candlestick maker theory several posts back, and your response? To call me stupid. I'm far from stupid 09:46, and that's what irks you.

  22. Poor old Ros....

    Brexit ? New Labour? Karma unfolding? Obsess much, old girl ?

    You're persuading a few narrow minded haters with the obligatory snipes at Ziggy.That's no great achievement.That you still do it tends to suggest that he hit you and your faithful often enough and hard enough without a decent rebuttal so all you have is the trademark ad hominem digs and total lack of subtlety.Then subtlety wouldn't work down the shallow end of the pool where your faithful paddle.Those with a more open and balanced mind were persuaded not only by so me of his points but by a lot of other points he exposed as having no basis in truth. He made a lot of sense and did it often.He took all criticisms, including the idiotic ones,and answered in full.Unfortunately he asked some pertinent questions to those who had the McCanns bang to rights but they wouldn't reply.So, he gets accused of being about 10 different people, an 'insider' or member of 'the inner circle'.That's pitiful as an argument, not to mention laughably paranoid.I'd say he used a limited number of persuasive arguments because that's all he needed.If nobody had a solid counter to them why expand ?

    This blog is tying all kinds to the McCanns because each theory is weak and getting weaker.200 weak theories don't make a strong case.A small amount of feasible theories that withstand attack or critical counter argument do.But, good theories that don't have the McCanns as guilty are red rags to bulls here.You have called a few extremely antagonistic posters ( one being of Scandinavian descent) who rarely make sense and wear blindfolds over their blinkers 'towering intellects'( Ros speak for 'people who see things as i see them') .They think the McCanns are guilty and what they spout is only of secondary importance to you.Zig always delighted in challenging them( and you) and is frequently referred to as 'uneducated' or 'semi educated'.You self-reference constantly with regard to your (perceived) high intellect, yet he ran rings around you just for fun. And still you your faithul puppies use the good old ad hominem insults when you have no argument.Your smarter readers know the score.You should read more and learn.Until you do, at least change the record. You shouldn't still be rattled by what he said, but your inability to resist the childish snipes illustrate that you clearly are.

    1. Anonymous 6 August 2018 at 19:58

      Point taken. Guilty as charged. I’ll look into the problem with my replies.



  23. 6th August 19:58
    Sounds very like ziggy to me.
    Almost as if he wrote it.
    Maybe he has a twin brother? ;)

    1. Lol. Busted!

      Ziggy's cross dressing twin brother Lady Sawdust!

      And he was awful nice.Really quite out of sight.....

    2. @10:51

      He has.:) It's me.:) I'm not nearly as good.:( Sometimes we disagree.:) But we get by with a smile without difficuly.:) We have different parents.


    3. Ziggy writing comments praising himself?
      Ha,ha,ha,I've heard it all now.
      Not such a great Zigmeister after all.

    4. Re Anonymous 6 August 2018 at 19:58

      Writing in the grammatical third person is a literary device.

      The writer’s comments should be judged on their merit


    5. @ T
      So if I write lots of comments in the third person saying how marvellous I am giving the impression that someone else wrote it,then that is fine and should be judged as such?

  24. Anonymous14 August 2018 at 17:33

    Absolutely, particularly in a virtual environment! The writers are free to write what they want. The readers are free to make their minds up about what they read. I do it all the time.

    If one is marvellous, why should it be problematic for anyone to say so? It wasn’t for Oscar Wilde.

    If you are marvellous, I’ll be delighted to hear about it, provided you tell me about it in a way I find interesting. And you can pretend to be anyone/anything.

    The public is wonderfully tolerant: it forgives everything except genius. But you are different, aren’t you?

    Why did you ask, dear?


    PS T is absolutely marvellous, marvellous, marvellous!!!!!! He must be a bit busy at the moment.

    1. @06:30



    2. So much for blog hits then.
      There are only half a dozen posters with mutiple id's.(if indeed that many).
      With delusions of grandeur too by the sound of it.
      Dr Jeckyll and many Hyde's.

    3. @ 09:07
      There is only one of me

    4. Only one of me too.

    5. There's too many of most of you. Begone from whence you came.Close the door on your way.You're absolute beginners.

    6. Anonymous 29 August 2018 at 23:57