MORAL PANIC AND MADELEINE MCCANN

Reading Dr. Bonn's article on Moral Panic, reminds me of that moment as a mature student when I found out Ben Hur was a gay film!  Ditto Spartacus and pretty much every sword and sandals film.  Now I have absolutely no problem with it being a gay film, and spotting the titillating lines of Truman Capote make it all the more delicious, but it was a lightbulb moment, an awakening.  And also a great big 'where the hell have I been most of my life?

I make no secret of the fact that I spent my early years as a snooty Dallas extra wannabe looking down on those who didn't work as hard as I did and saying 'ears ears' to Maggie Thatcher simply because she was a woman!  A fling with a trade unionist put me right on most issues, but Germaine's 'Female Eunich' sealed the deal.   I was then a feminist and a Marxist, but pretty enough that the tory men I dated found it cute. Now, not so much, lol. 

I didn't go into higher education until my late 30's, and of course I knew it all (a character flaw).  But I didn't, and I was for a short period of time, truly alarmed at how little I knew!  I was fortunate to have an equally mature compatriot (luv you Sue!) doing the same course by my side, and six months in,  it hit us.  There was no turning back.  Since then I keep finding doors that I have not yet opened and I have to kick myself and say doh!  My own blog, happily, has been one of those doors to enlightenment, that continues to throw up  new and alternate ways of thinking, it is as much an education for me as I hope it is for my readers.

Please forgive the anecdotal stuff, I know how much it winds some readers up, but for most I hope, the subtext gets through.  For some people they reach an age or stage, where they think they know everything, or that is the way they want to be seen by everyone around them.  They think admitting you did not know something is a character flaw.  People like Bennett, Richard Hall and Jim Gamble would never say the words 'well, I did not know that'.  Funnily enough, I like to be proved wrong, I like to be persuaded to look at issues from a different perspective, I'm in awe at the intellect of anyone who has been able to change my mind.  I can actually pinpoint the exact moment I went from tory to socialist, thank you Keith Waterhouse.

I'm trying to explain, not very well, that it is OK to acknowledge you were wrong, that the belief system you were indoctrinated with from childhood might not be the only way.  It's like that moment when Nietzsche's words 'God is dead, there is no God' suddenly hit you, and you begin to understand the meaning of life in a way that you never did before.

I hope by now, those following the last discussion have now read and digested the Dr. Scott Bonn's 'Moral Panic: Who Benefits' article, because it so skilfully and articulately outlines exactly what happened in the Madeleine MCann case. 

However, since the extraordinarily enlightening article of Professor Scott Bonn, those shrieking 'think of the children' have gone abnormally quiet.  The introduction of this article, preceded by the artistically insightful post by Bjorn, has I hope made some of the more moderate 'child defenders' have a rethink as to exactly what it is they are defending.

 

Unlike many professors, Dr. Bonn explains the phenomenon of Moral Panic in a way that we can all easily understand.  It is of course a concept that should be familiar to every criminologist and every journalist, but they are among the groups that benefit from it, so they play along.

 

'Moral panic has been defined as a situation in which public fears and state interventions greatly exceed the objective threat posed to society by a particular individual or group who is/are claimed to be responsible for creating the threat in the first place'.

 

Clarence Mitchell it could be said, was a grandmaster at creating a Moral Panic, 11 years on and the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is still newsworthy.  But the crown should of course go to Jim Gamble, who appears  regularly on television to frighten children, and pile more stress and paranoia on their already fear ridden parents.  There are 700,000 or is it 750,000 potential child molesters in our midst.  All triggered by the sight of naked children or children in their underwear, cartoons and potentially renaissance paintings and sculptures.  They are ordinary people apparently, teachers, police, GPs, writers, etc, all waiting in the wings to  groom a child online and meet them in a car park. 

 

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann brought the subject of paedophilia to the front of the news.  Parents all over the world now had the added fear that their babies could literally be stolen from their beds.  If it could happen to responsible parents like Kate and Gerry, it could happen to you.  And Madeleine was an appealing toddler, a poster child, who raised awareness for missing peoples charities and those who would seek out and destroy all these hundreds of thousands of perverts in our midst.

 

For me, one of the saddest aspects of the whole fiasco is the effect these 'scares' have on young parents, as if they didn't have enough to worry about.  Kids now have NO freedom.  They can't go out and make friends not chosen by their parents, and they can't do all the things my generation did, like play out from morning til night.  They will live shorter lives than we will, because their parents think they are safer in front of a PC screen with a pizza. 

 

It was strange to see two Doctors,  contributing so wholeheartedly to spreading the fear, by exaggerating the risks and extent of the problem by teaming up with Jim Gamble and Mark Williams-Thomas, both media consultants and experts in CSA and both benefiting from the public's belief that paedophiles are all around us. 

 

As Dr. Bonn explains, the Media are complicit in spreading the fear because they need sensational news to attract readers, viewers and advertisers.  Jim Gamble can be relied on to present the kind of statistics that should grab headlines, but for some reason, rarely do.  The interview he gave with 'Alex' paedophile hunter sat beside him on Good Morning TV was quite bizarre.  He was still selling his idea of a 'Citizens Army' to combat paedophiles online as if the problem were urgent and endemic.  If it is urgent and endemic, shouldn't the first port of call be the children and their parents.  Ie. Telling them what to look out for and how to stay safe?  It is the parents' job to keep their children safe, not child protection officers.  And to all those who gasp at 'Alex's' stories of paedophiles chatting to 9 year olds.  Stop and think for a moment.  Who, if anyone, lets their 9 year old chat to strangers on the net?  Unfortunately, whenever the 'P' word is mentioned, common sense leaves the building.

 

But let's return to Madeleine, and another way in which her disappearance has been used to create Moral Panic.  This time, trolls on the net.  The lawlessness of the worldwide web gives anyone the freedom to say pretty much anything they like.  Old legislation doesn't work in the cyber age, and secrets cannot remain secret.  Trolls became the new Folk Devils.  Especially those trolls who targeted the parents of Madeleine McCann, whose supporters helpfully, kept a record of every insult they received going back several years.  The case for the prosecution was ready. 

 

Except, it didn't go to plan.  The target troll was a nice middle aged lady, who was driven to suicide by the sheer horror of what was done to her.  The public were outraged.  Brenda Leyland wasn't a folk devil, she was an ordinary woman, and she could have been any one of them.  Unfortunately, that took the 'trolls are now public enemy No. 1' cause back a few years.  If the harmless Brenda was the face of 'trolls', we could all breathe a huge sigh of relief. 

Gerry and Kate have been actively involved in several situations that create moral panic.  The Algarve is full of paedophiles, child trafficking is prolific (need for harsher border controls), Hacking and calls for new legislation to control the media, internet trolls and calls for harsher laws to imprison them.  They should, by now, be completely aware of what they doing, even if they don't know there is a name for it.  Do they ever wonder about the knock on effects of the fear they stir up? 

They exaggerated the problem of paedophiles whilst campaigning to find Madeleine, how many innocent men were targeted and had their names attached to the child's disappearance?  They exaggerated the problem of internet trolls.  An innocent woman died.  Yes, they have been the subject of discussion more than most victims of crime, but hey, for good reason.  No cause has been discovered for their daughter's disappearance.  I have been a member of many groups, but even as mad as some of them are, there has never been any physical threat towards the family.  Bennett went close with his pamphlet thing and should have been locked up, but by now they  [the McCanns] should be aware that even the raving loons who stalk them online, including a few of their own followers, are cowardly inadequates who will never come near them

Of course it could be that the McCanns too were duped.  Unaware that their plight was being used to usher in new paedophile laws and initiatives to convince the public we need a specially trained branch of law enforcement to police the internet.  Amber alert of course, was all about border controls and calls for all new born babies to have their DNA stored, the beginnings of New Labour's ultimate dream to have a national database on every citizen.  And  what better way to promote that than to plant the idea that babies and young children are in constant danger of being stolen.    

Hacked Off of course was a direct attack on the media.  For a while there the UK went nuts, journalists became the folk devils and all those with lots to hide could breath a big sigh of relief.  I've never been able to figure out why Gerry and Kate went to battle against the media, but I suspect they hoped to regain public sympathy, and perhaps financial reward.  I didn't watch their entire testimonies to Leveson, but I raised an eyebrow when Gerry said they should be paid every time the tabloids used their images as they [the tabloids] were profiting from them.  It was as if you could literally see him gnawing away at the hand that was feeding him. 

In any event, I don't think the McCanns profited or won any new friends with their involvement in the Leveson Inquiry, more likely, they lost a lot of old ones.  But Hacked Off is a good example of a Moral Panic having run it's course.   When all those demonising the press thought about what they were doing, in the cold light of day, they probably (hopefully) realised the stupidity of demanding the free press be censored.  The MSM are now in turmoil, not because of privacy laws, but because they now face so much competition.  Why would followers of a topic bother with heavily censored and blatantly biased reporting, when there are blogs and websites that will tell them the truth? (such as moi :)

The Madeleine case too, has run it's course, that is, its' ability to stir up extreme emotion.  All those fears that the Algarve is filled with paedophiles and child predators have not panned out.  No other child has gone missing, no child traffickers have been uncovered and no stolen children have been rescued.   Happily most of the fears born out of Madeleine's disappearance haven't come to pass, and we can look back with hindsight and understand how most of them were based on the hysteria that existed at the time.  We were led to believe that every cherubic toddler was at risk.  Totally untrue of course, most missing kids are spotty, belligerent teens, not nearly so photogenic as Madeleine.

It could of course blow up again, because the governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were compromised.    Of course Blair and Brown could simply say their orders were 'give them [the McCanns] all the help they need'  and that 'legally' was implied.  They can blame the minions for misinterpreting their instructions.  But in any event, should the full details of this case ever be revealed, they will include top ministers and police chiefs.  All of whom will have to admit they were completely taken in by the abduction story.  Oops for them, and even bigger Oops for those experts in the field, Jim Gamble and Mark Williams-Thomas.  How do these crime experts explain how they couldn't see what thousands of amateurs online have seen for years?
 

NO TO PAEDOPHILE HUNTERS!

UPDATE  31/01/18

Older readers will remember that horrible time in the 1980's when the evil Sidney Cooke led a gang of paedophiles in the rape and murder of 7 year old Mark Tildesley, 14 year old Jason Swift and other boys who had disappeared.  The arrest of Cooke led to the uncovering the evil gang known as 'The Dirty Dozen', whose modus operandi was to lure rent boys and runaways back to their flat, where they would be drugged, raped and murdered. 

Most of their victims were missing teenagers, boys who had run away from home who were picked up at the London terminals with offers of friendship and a bed for the night.  It will probably never be known how many were killed by this gang.  I imagine this is an ongoing heart ache for families of missing loved ones.  

Their game was up when they snatched 7 year old Mark Tildesley at a funfair, his young age, setting off a massive police investigation that resulted in the trial and conviction of these evil men.  And of course, it highlighted the dangers faced by rent boys and runaways, not just in London, but worldwide.  I have no doubt those dangers still exist, and it is heart  breaking, but hopefully now there is much more awareness, and of course CCTV and phones in our pockets that can pinpoint exactly where we are. 

Cooke's gang were targeting 'lost' kids, that is kids who could disappear without trace, and without a public outcry.  They had a target demographic, and sadly, they were easy pickings.  Easily identifiable getting off the trains with their backpacks and luggage.  Today's equivalent I suppose would honing in on troubled kids via social media, a game of numbers, how many 'fuck off you perv's' do they get before  they find a victim?  I'm guessing a lot, which is probably why most paedophile hunters are trying to entrap each other. 

Cooke and his evil gang, showed us a dark murky side of life that was unknown to most of us.  We knew exactly who the evil ones were and sadly, we discovered how easy it was for this gang to prey on vulnerable teenagers.  Valuable lessons were learned and if they weren't, I advise every parent with a stroppy teenager to tell them the story of 'Hissing Sid' as the vile creature was known.  That scary time between little Mark's disappearance and the arrest of the evil gang will I am sure be ingrained in those of us who remember it, the whole of the UK knew a paedophile gang were snatching children. 

Apparently Jim Gamble, former head of CEOP has said there are 700,000 paedophiles operating in the UK.  I don't know what that means, but it sounds truly alarming.  Are they paedophiles in the Sidney Cooke mould? Does operating mean active?  As in trying to groom children online?  The figure is staggering, but more troubling in my opinion, is who are their victims?  The childrens homes and institutions no longer exist, and it is very hard now for anyone to go off radar.  As I don't know what this 700k demographic is made up of, I presume he means on social media, thus presenting the internet as the biggest danger to our kids and the need for a specially trained police force. 

An army of online paedophile hunters would effectively be a branch of law and order devoted to pre-crime activities.  A less sophisticated Minority Report system that arrests people before they go on to commit a crime.  The majority of that 750,000, actually, scrap that, 749,999 will probably Not molest a child.  Viewing even the vilest of pornography does not lead to violent crime, anymore than a video nasty or a song by Marilyn Manson sends millions of teens on a killing spree.  It just doesn't happen.  Evil isn't triggered by movies, books, music, the arts or even pornography.  It was there before the internet, see Sidney Cooke.

Just to be absolutely clear, I do not condone child pornography in any way but I do not accept that looking at images makes these 750k men dangerous criminals.  I have never seen the kind of 'sickening stuff' that is said to be available on the net, nor do I want to.  But if this kind of thing is happening, why aren't the makers and distributors of these images being rounded up?  I don't buy the argument that the audience are responsible, it's like trying to stop the drug trade by targeting the users. I would much rather hear that the children who are the subjects of these vile images are being rescued and that the bastards assaulting them are being locked up.  If the police in the 1980's were able to swoop in on Sidney Cooke and his gang, there should be no excuse now.  We live in an age of constant communication and constant surveillance, how are these 750,000 paedophiles able to operate? 

Ps.  I have just read the Times Article on Jim Gamble.  The predators apparently can be teachers, police officers....... from all parts of society etc....'.  Wow pretty much anyone can be arrested and charged for a pre-crime.   

Unfortunately, I do not have a Times subscription so cannot reply, so, Dear Bishop Blake, I am a careleaver and survivor of a Catholic childrens home and I'm happy to assure you, paedophilia is not rife.  In my 60 years on this earth, the only place I encountered it was in the Convent.  I also encountered sadism and brutality, sexual abuses's less salacious sidekicks .

I don't know what kind of crazy world you live in Bishop, but with my opposite of a sheltered life, I suspect I'm a lot closer to reality than you are, and I have never met anyone the slightest bit interested in having sex with kids.  And it's the kind of thing you would remember.  Young adults and thirtysomethings are much more interested in each other, than they are in kids.  Heck, chuck in the 50s and 60s too and few sprightly 70 year olds too. 

I sometimes wonder if these paedophile hunters have ever spent any time with actual children?  Because 99% of the time, they are a gigantic pain in the arse. The one who stays in with the kids has drawn the short straw.  They talk incessantly, and when not talking they are singing or doing somersaults on your white sofa with sticky mitts and chocolate goo coming out of their mouths.  Then there are the demands.  Every time you sit down, they think up a new one.  Your only hope of survival is to play something repetitive until one or both of you falls asleep. 

As nobody wants to go below the surface of the 'P' word, the logistics and the reality are completely overlooked.  Saying there are 750,000 paedophiles in the UK disguised as teachers, police officers, etc, (not doctors?) is truly bizarre.  How are they able to operate?  Are they taking advantage of their professions?  Are kids being molested at school and by the police?  The key word, as used by the Bishop is 'potential', 750k potential paedophiles.  That is anyone who has looked at something they shouldn't could potentially have their lives and careers destroyed because it is assumed they will abduct and kill a child.  That is an almighty leap, but it bumps up the fear factor. 

I tend not to think there are paedophile gangs in the suburbs made up of teachers, police officers etc.  Not just because the idea is disgusting, but because it is completely unheard of.  People tend not to sexually abuse their children and pass them around to the neighbours, the idea is so sick, it wouldn't even make the plot of a seriously disturbed 'B' movie.  I fear the Bishop has very little faith in human nature if he thinks it does.  Yet we must accept it as true because it comes from an online child abuse expert and a Bishop.   



_____________________________________

I rarely visit the cesspit (CMoMM), because I simply don’t have their stomach for their deplorable fascist views.  They quite literally leave me feeling nauseous.  Today especially as they have an entire thread devoted to paedophiles and what they would like to do with them.  

 

I’m not quite sure what the consensus is, as they are both berating Jim Gamble, who’s name heads the title of the thread, whilst at the same time supporting his idea of an army of vigilantes trained to track down paedophiles online.  The idea of a specialist police force to track down paedophiles online is horrendous, I’m not sure it would even stand up in a communist or fascist state?  What powers would these non police be given?  The power to access the online activity of anyone they choose? The power to kick in doors at the crack of dawn and the power to seize children and computers as Operation Ore did in 2002?  Happily, I’ve never seen anyone, other than Jim Gamble promoting the idea.

 

The subject of paedophilia however is so emotive and yucky, that most people act with their primal instincts. Quite rightly, we are genetically programmed to protect our young. I’m not a violent person in any way, but when I see the evil faces of convicted child murderers I want to batter them to a pulp. I get the anger and the rage.  Unfortunately, rage blinds us to logic and reason, that's why discussion of this subject is almost impossible. 

So let's start with the basics.  The generic image of a paedophile is a dirty old man alone in his bedroom trying to groom young girls and boys online. Someone socially inept, isolated but somehow also hooked up to others just like him, extremely unlikely btw, because paedophiles have difficulty relating to their peers, on any level.  This group, happily is minute, and the perpetrators more likely to be sad, than bad, they are afraid to go out. 

The next group are the opportunists, the psychopaths like Ian Huntley and Mark Bridger.  These are almost impossible to legislate against, they are a freak of nature and every society has them.  Their crimes don't stem from the internet, the evil was always within them.  On the plus side, they are very, very rare.

The largest group by far, are those active paedophiles who ingratiate themselves into vulnerable families by grooming the Mother.  Or they are friends, relatives or even professionals.  Almost every abused child, was abused by someone who knew them.  And it is not just sexual abuse, it is physical and psychological cruelty.  Physical abuse, which is far more prevalent and can be fatal, rarely if ever gets a mention.  The best protection is education, so much is spent on educating children on internet safety, how about educating them on safety in their immediate world.  Especially those young naïve mothers who go from abusive relationship to abusive relationship.  We should be empowering children and young parents, not taking over their personal responsibility. 

We are all being taught to fear the internet in the same way our predecessors were taught to fear books.  And those planting the seeds and spreading the terror are not doing it for philanthropic reasons.  They have blown the problem of internet trolls,  completely out of proportion, most are halfwits posting infantile threats, who are, in reality, afraid of their own shadows.  I don't know how anyone takes them seriously.  As for paedophiles online, the danger does not outweigh the benefits.  That some bad people use the internet, should not be an excuse to police it for everyone.  .
 

But let's get back to the central theme.  The policing of the internet by untrained police who are not bound to the same high standards as the professionals is abhorrent.  It reminds me of that moment when Napoleon introduces his attack dogs to Animal Farm,  I can't think of anything scarier, than if King Jong Ung were to take the helm. 

 

Where does it end? Their agenda may be to track down paedophiles, but what if they stumble on other crimes along the way?  The keeping of a database of an internet's user's activity online is wide open to abuse, including corruption and blackmail.  If it is one of their own, a paedophile hunter, do they keep it quiet?  How do they select their victims, targets? Isn't a bit weird for grown men to pretend to be scantily clad teenage girls? Just curious.  Effectively, we have a situation where paedophile hunters are talking to each other while pretending to be nubile teens.

 

I have seen Jim Gamble pitch his 'people's army' or whatever it is he wants to call his specialist vigilantes, but I've never seen anyone take up the cause.  It is not in step with the spirit of times.  The real Masters of the Universe reside in Silicone Valley, and their aim is to get information to everyone on the planet, they are genetically opposed to the kind of restrictions Jim Gamble wants to  put in place.  JG now finds himself out of step in the real world having to compete on a level playing field, he doesn't have the police advantages he once had.  And he is competing with young internet geniuses who had laptops when he had a teddy bear.  He is a duck out of water where new apps are concerned, it's a young person's industry.  Though I fear had he put his ideas forward in the Blair era he would have got what he wanted and that's where the  Animal Farm reference came in, in case anyone is wondering :)

 

The whole idea of vigilantes and paedophile hunters has less to do with protecting children, than it does with wanting to be part of an angry mob taking out their rage on a deserving victim.  It's ugly.  It's uncivilised.  There is something savage and Lord of the Flies about it.   A couple of years ago, I read with horror, how a drunken British mob chased a Spanish waiter who had the audacity to chat to British kids in the swimming pool.  You small, small people, your fear is not only deranged and illogical, it could have resulted in a tragedy.  And let me take this opportunity to thank every foreign waiter I have ever met, who has kindly taken the time to chat to and amuse my kids  holiday.  They are among the happy memories we always came away with. 

Since when did kids become sexualised?  Answer: Never, because 99.9% of us don't see kids that way and never will.  It would never have entered our minds that our kids were sex symbols lusted after by at least three quarters of the adult population.  Maybe someone should come up with a new line in baby hijabs.  Cover the little blighters from head to toe! 

Yes, we have now reached the ridiculous stage.  Ancient lost tribes are laughing at us, they know the photographer isn't actually stealing their souls.  Let's look at worse case scenario.  Imagine a pervert does get hold of your child's picture.  What is he going to do with it?  Ok, apart from the yucky obvious, but so what?  There are billions of pictures of children on the internet, including children of the royal, the rich and famous.  Unless you and family go around with bags over your heads, your image can be captured by anyone, anywhere. 

But I have entwined two topics, which I am afraid was beyond my control.  I should explain.  As the subject of paedophilia is yucky and most of us know little about it, this army of paedophile hunters could accuse anyone of anything.  The key to their success is entrapment.  Something frowned upon in the official police, and open to all sorts of abuse, particularly if the target is anyone they choose.

In theory an internet army of paedophile hunters doesn't sound such a bad idea, if they are guilty they deserve to be caught and they deserve to face an angry mob in a car park.  No-one will speak for them, and no-one can speak for them, without being accused of being a paedophile, or a paedophile supporter.  Ergo, this mob justice is allowed to flourish unchallenged and if Jim Gamble has his way, it will have a government stamp of approval.

But the reality is, real lives are being affected, some destroyed, I understand there have been suicides.  They may 'catch' some guilty men, but what of the effect on the wives, children and families of these men? The deceptive nature of the job makes me question the morality of those who would apply, it is a job for professional liars and those who get a kick out of leading angry mobs.  It isn't a fight back against paedophiles - real child abuse in real time is flourishing in these hard times.  It is the targeting of a tiny pathetic minority, while ignoring ALL of the bigger issues.  If these people care so much about children, why don't they get together a lorry load of provisions for the kids in the refugee camps?  Or better still, start up an after school dinner club for all those kids who are going hungry?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

STOCKHOLM SYNDROME OR SELF PROTECTION?

 

In response to Bjorn's post on the last blog, I had never considered Stockholm Syndrome with regard to the group dynamics, but it perfectly describes the kind of situation where a group's fear of breaking a pact, is stronger than their fear of the consequences if the truth were told.  

 

Turning to Stockholm Syndrome as it relates to the Tapas group is intriguing.  All these people, who may now in fact hate each other, are bound together forever more. This little house of cards is just one puff away from tumbling down.  Though to be fair, their silence has worked thus far, 11 years on and no-one arrested or charged.  Despite Gerry taunting the police for years with 'no evidence' and 'prove it', almost safe in the knowledge that it can't be done.  How is he so confident?

 

A strong character, or characters are holding this pact together, based initially on the collective decision to leave the children alone in the apartments and I agree, it's Gerry.  His need to control, well everything, was apparent from the off. And that included the Portuguese police investigation - miffed at not being put in charge, he started an investigation of his own. And his own search and his own campaign and his own media monitoring unit.  Apart from wearing a massive ‘I am a control freak’ badge, his control needs could not be more obvious.  David Payne I am not so sure of, but it was he who first referred to a 'pact' and it was he who led Yvonne Martin and away and told her to sod off. 

 

The tapas group may well need psychological help, but they are educated adults with free will, their prison is of their own making.  Their fears, I am sure, all go back to that night in May 2007, when they made the worst decision of their lives.  However, my sympathy for them stops there. Some, if not all, were happy to frame an innocent man, Robert Murat, for something he didn't do.  That goes into the realms of evil.  They are all complicit, all standing on the steps of the Royal Courts of Justice, celebrating their victory. Each of them having it within their power to bring the Madeleine 'search' to a dignified end, but choosing not to, some might say.  

 

How seriously the ‘choosing not to’ is taken by the Portuguese Judiciary and Scotland Yard remains to be seen.  Do we, the UK, have an equivalent to the US Fifth Amendment?  The right to remain silent, without anything being assumed from it? Please do correct me if I wrong here, and I’m sure someone will, lol.  Is it keeping silent, or withholding evidence?  Or the far more serious, perverting the course of justice? 

 

What are the consequences of that silence? Well both Portugal and the UK have been put to considerable cost, financially, and this lengthy investigation has tied up the services of many detectives for many years. The newspaper barons have been forced into paying out hundreds of thousands in damages and faced the wrath of the public in Leveson.  At least two British Prime Ministers and a couple of Home Secretaries will face huge embarrassment when their poor judgement is exposed, and embarrassment is the best they can hope for.  

 

The McCanns and their friends have far more to fear from those higher up the social scale than those at the bottom who they perceive to be their enemies. Among that sea of red faces will be many intent on revenge.  For example, the Madeleine case has been the kiss of death for the tabloids. As recently as 2007, most of us still believed that the newspapers were not allowed, by law, to lie to us - we knew of course that they were politically biased, but we had no idea how far the rabbit hole went.
However, in 2007, news was no longer restricted by borders.  And as a human interest story, it reached a much bigger demographic, even Sun readers began to see that their daily newspaper was lying to them.  Those of us hooked by the drama straight away, were witness to the huge difference in the way the Madeleine case was reported in the UK and the way it was reported in Portugal. We ‘english’ were being stirred up to believe this was a case of National pride, two British citizens were being victimized.  And alarmingly, our government and the MSM were in on it!  They chose to believe the two British suspects over the Portuguese police. 

 

But returning to Stockholm Syndrome and all those closely involved.  Each, I think have secrets and fears, each will be judged on their own actions and decisions.  They have not protected themselves with their statements to the PJ, they have protected Gerry and Kate.  They too were stupid enough to leave babies and young children unattended while they went out to dinner.  It was a group decision, and each of their statements are that part of the puzzle that makes up the 'group statement'.  All agreed on Madeleine's colouring book on the night the child disappeared, and reaffirmed in a get together prior to the Rogatory interviews. 

 

If each of them were isolated and questioned individually without collaboration with the rest of the group, their statements would probably be quite different.   The tapas group stayed in PDL for a further 10 days after Madeleine disappeared, giving plenty of time to build a story and alibis.  They weren't out searching with the police and volunteers, they stayed close to the parents throughout.  They didn't search on the night and they didn't help with the searches in the days that followed.  For me, their failure to search for the child speaks volumes.

I very much doubt the group have grown closer over the years, the secret they share must be like having a heavy chain around your neck, a chain that gets heavier and tighter with each passing year.  As a commitment phobe, I can't imagine anything worse than being bound to other people against my will.  The tapas group were not lifelong friends, they did know each other as well as they said, which makes it all the more strange that the parents had 100% faith that their friends weren't involved. 

We all meet hundreds of friends along life's journey, but very few last long enough to become part of our intimate circle.  For me it is usually 3, 4 at a push, that's all I have time for, I like Jerry Seinfeld's practical approach on the issue of friends, each has a place and there are rarely vacancies!  For each of my close friends, I could give a zillion reasons why they could not and would not steal a child.  For friends on the periphery that I hardly know, I couldn't say the same.  Kate was witness to her friends leaving the table during the course of the dinner, how could she not suspect them?  

The foundations for this group's relationship were built on very rocky ground, each is dependent on the other not to expose them as liars.  Each has to stick to the group statement compiled on the back of Maddie's colouring book.  They cannot deviate from the script in any way, and every time they talk about it, the chances are they will.  Gerry and Kate, Kate especially, become very agitated when asked to go over the details of that night.  They recite the well practised and rehearsed set script.  There is no embellishment and nothing else has come to mind in 11 years, no detail as to how they reached that collective decision to leave the kids alone, no detail as to their own behaviour that night and the days that followed.   The nearest to a human reaction, was bizarrely, Gerry's calling from God as he prayed in the local church.  Go forth and find Maddie, and all missing children, the good Lord told him, not in those exact words, I believe it was a tunnel of light.  

I'm not sure Stockholm Syndrome applies to the tapas friends, admittedly it could be because I have little sympathy for them.  Their cavalier attitude towards the duty of care they owed their children, appals me, so too their arrogance.  In fact I think I will wind myself up by having a re-read of their rogatory interviews.  

I also think there are several alpha males within that group, who are vying to be top dog, they are all competitive but perhaps none so much as Gerry, whose tennis tournaments continued while others searched for his daughter.   Gerry takes the crown, but I doubt the others are submissive, they each hold Ace cards they can play at any time.  Gerry is as enslaved as any hostages he has taken, they all are.

 

 

 

IDES OF MARCH II - THE END OF THE SEARCH

UPDATE:  12/01/18

Bizarre, that the rabid 'antis' and the rabid 'pros' are singing from the same hymn sheet in their belief that Operation Grange are performing some kind of cover up.  The 'antis' believe they are covering up for the parents and the 'pros' believe they are covering up for government agents.  Other than that, their arguments are pretty much the same.

The 'antis' drawn to the case by their penchant for conspiracies have been resolute on the 'cover up' theory since day 1.  And that's where their thinking has stayed and festered.  But conspiracy is not altogether a dirty word, conspiracies can and do happen on a daily basis.  There has been a conspiracy in the missing Madeleine case.  If there hadn't been, it would have ended 10 years ago.  It is when conspiracies go off into the land of fantasy and speculation, that they become problematic, in a time wasting sense.

All the 'pros' commenting on my blog are convinced that not only is there a cover up, but that all the police working on the investigation are corrupt.  Not the sort of thing you would expect from someone speaking on behalf of a missing child and to whom everything they have asked for has been given. 

The McCanns, it could be said, have good reason to be angry with Scotland Yard and Operation Grange.  They haven't found the McCanns' missing daughter nor have they convinced the public that they [the parents] were not involved.  But those are the not the reasons given by the pro defenders, they cite other unrelated cases as evidence of police corruption. 

Ideally they would like Madeleine's case to be filed away unsolved.  Why? and Wtf?  That's not a good result for Madeleine or her parents, it means no-one will be looking for her.  I suspect SY have told the parents Madeleine is dead, and they are not accepting it.  But I suspect the result they hoped for, Madeleine is alive and findable, is the least likely conclusion of OG.

It seems the remains of the McCann Media Monitoring department (not their finest) are using my blog to plant seeds of distrust in Operation Grange.  Do they have no hope whatsoever that OG will produce evidence that clears the parents and their friends completely?  Why so negative towards a report that hasn't been published?  What are their fears? 

Why aren't the Pro McCanns pro Operation Grange?  Why aren't they thanking and defending those detectives who have put so much time into searching for their daughter?.   I have watched many docu-dramas where the loved ones of missing people bond with those police officers who pick up the cold case files, they become friends of the family.  There doesn't appear to be any bonding here, nor any sense of gratitude for what Operation Grange are doing.  They are playing a two hand game -  publicly thanking Scotland Yard, but privately sending out social media warriors to diss them.  

Sadly for them, they no longer have the power to destroy a police officer's life and career in the British tabloids, as far as I know, none of the UK tabloids have run with OG officers having lunch or coming off a 24hr shift, or indeed infantile name calling like 'sardine munchers'.  I sincerely hope there is some sort of ruling, or mutual moral agreement between the police and the media, not to target the private lives of police officers working on homicide cases.    The media has much to be ashamed of in it's persecuting of targets selected by the McCann family, police officers especially.   

But a quick word on protests.  With so many other far more newsworthy topics, it's likely there will not be much interest in the conclusions of Operation Grange.  Most people have never heard of it and don't care.  But those who have a good idea of how far the rabbit hole actually goes will not accept the cover up of the initial actions of the incumbent government and the British police agencies who flew out to PDL.  The imperialistic assumption that our police are better than your police.  Gerry and Kate are already in a prison of their own making.  They are stuck with the fake goody two shoes personalities they themselves devised.  They left no room for human error, they are perfect.  An oft used word in Kate's book.

The strive for perfection can send even the most stable over the edge.  Think of an OCD guy mowing a camomile lawn in exact horizontal lines, being confronted by a small mutt cocking a leg? Or worse, squatting?  For myself, perfect is not a word I use often, not even when my Yorkshires are flowing over and a dark crunchy brown.  Even my sponges, at which I am now genius level, I prefer to use the term 'Paul Hollywood handshake'. 
For my disasters, I growl at my guests to fill in the feedback form, if they dare!        

But I jest.  I strive for perfection with my writing, and I torment myself daily for not being good enough.  I want to blame everyone and everything else, but I accept it's all down to me.  Even if I write something blinding with thousands of hits, I am left in terror that I won't be able to do it again.  An artist's life is not a happy lot!  Nor is the life of anyone seeking an insane level of perfection.   

But back to the idea of protests when Operation Grange ends.  Do enough people feel that strongly?  I suspect not.  Gerry and Kate are not cartoon villains like Toby Young, they are the parents who lost a child.  An angry mob shouting for their arrest is never going to be tasteful or endearing.  

I think on the angry mob front, all that remains is the half a dozen who post in the cesspit and in MMM.  Most people have managed to keep their interest in this case in perspective.   Personally, I wouldn't be happy if the blame for not finding Madeleine was placed on the PJ and Goncalo Amaral. Though I don't think for one minute that will be happening, because if it were, the McCanns right now, would be jubilant. 

___________________________________







The announcement of DCI Rowley's retirement in March has sparked off another round of posts that put 2 and 2 together and make 5.  I doubt Mr. Rowley (I don't know his rank) had much, if anything to do with the case of missing Madeleine.  As a senior officer, the Madeleine case was probably one among hundreds that he oversaw, whether he or someone else is in overall charge, won't make any difference to the outcome. 

 

I get the impression most people still believe there is a cover up afoot and when the funding ends in March, that will be it.  It will be filed under some sort of Official Secrets that decrees it should not be looked at for 75 years.  That is probably the ideal end game for those feeling very uncomfortable right now, but realistically, it's very unlikely. 

 

Can you imagine the announcement:  'We know what happened to Madeleine McCann, but we are not telling anyone' or 'We don't know, were nearly there a couple of time and thanks for the top ups, but we got nothing' or 'none of us have got any intention of telling anyone what we have been doing this past 6 years, so don't ask'. 

 

There is no diplomatic way to end this multimillion pound investigation without questions being asked.  I was going to say, public outcry, but, see previous blog, the McCann case has slipped right down the public interest scale.  If it ended with no result however, even the moderate would protest.

 

From the perspective of Gerry and Kate McCann, they fear their enemies are salivating at their impending downfall.  They may well be right, their fame has attracted the worse of human nature, but this is not a case to feel smug about.  No-one wins.  I personally have never had any interest or stomach for retribution, nor the punishment side of crime and punishment and it's not the focus of this blog.   It is horrible to see anyone suffer, even if they have brought that suffering on themselves.

If the objective of Operation Grange was to clear the parents of all suspicion, their actions have done the opposite.  If they are to relieve the parents of that ominous cloud, they will have to prove Madeleine was abducted by a stranger they failed to catch.  Can you imagine the CVs of the 30+ detectives assigned to Operation Grange.  'Spent 6 years working of a missing child that failed to achieve a result'.  

Once you apply logic to the arguments of those who claim the investigation is a cover up, you can see how nonsensical their arguments are.  They completely overlook the human factor.  The men and women working on OG are human beings with emotions, opinions and values.  This case is about a missing child, the victim is their focus.  To assume that they would conspire to cover up the disappearance of a child is insulting.  I cringe at the insults hurled at the known names of the detectives who have worked on this case.  The childish allegations that these men and women are using this case for excursions to the Algarve are, effectively, telling us that is what they would do, because where else could the idea have come from?  Most people aren't scumbags.  Even I, not the world's best employee, gave everything to the jobs I had - aren't we all inherently driven to be the best that we can be?  Why would any one of those officers meekly accept
a glaring gap in their career history?  Or indeed a skeleton that may at any time, fall out of the closet

The case of missing Madeleine was a huge knock in the faith if human nature, in a way it was an awakening.  Almost daily confirmation that the MSM did in fact have the power to make a lie, the truth.  Had Madeleine disappeared before the internet, the alternate truth, the story of Goncalo Amaral would have been contained by borders.  Now, no matter how many victories a claimant has against the tabloids, they cannot stop the spread of news and information on the internet.  The first point of call for most people's news. News agencies can no longer distort the news by showing just one angle because most people carry around camera phones.  And there is no legal way to stop alternate views from being discussed on social media.   

Goncalo's Truth of the Lie, is not available on the shelves of British bookshops, but it is instantly available, and translated, online.  As are the Portuguese police files. Kudos to Gerry and Kate on that one, not even Donald Trump can get a book banned!  Perhaps Clarence should mention it in his CV and get it off to the Donald immediately.  And for those who accuse me of 'hate', yes, hands up, I do indeed have an extra special dislike for book banners and burners.

I do happen to believe, that the truth will out in March.  And I think March will be a very good time to release news some would prefer was overtaken by bigger events.  The mad reign of the self anointed God that is Donald Trump, will come to a spectacular end, by March I am sure, and the fall out will spread to the UK, as the British public question Theresa May's over eagerness to deal with him.   An influx of scandals may be fighting for the front pages and the headlines.  Interest in the Madeleine case is probably at it's lowest ebb, but, depending on the revelations, it still has the potential to cause another massive media wave.  It might be that a human interest story could distract the public's attention from bigger things that are going on, or it may in itself be the bigger thing, depending on how deep OG go. 

Everyone I think, even the parents, have given up on the possibility of Madeleine's disappearance having a good ending.  Neither Madeleine or her remains have been found, and some will never accept closure until she is.  The parents may well know the conclusions that Scotland Yard have reached, and it may be they have rejected them.  There is a good chance they will re-start their own search for a live child, in which case any rift between the parents and the police will become glaringly apparent.  

I believe it will end in March, and with the precedent set by the PJ, the investigation files will be transparent, especially as these files will have to be added to the PJ files when the case concludes in Portugal.  The only narrative that will fit the facts and evidence available is the true one.








Ps.  Ferrero Rocher - My struggle! 

A dear friend gave me a box of the delicious, naughty little delights,

Step 1.  Put box in fridge to chill min. 10 mins.  OK, 8, 5 at an absolute push.

Step 2.  Attempt to open box and shriek in horror on discovering it is impossible, only Thor could get the lid off!

Step 3.  Get large carving knife and do what's necessary, sledgehammer must be absolute last resort.

Step 4.  Reconsider carving knife - is it worth 13 hours waiting in A&E, where said little ball of scrumptiousness will have to be prised from the cold dead hand they are trying to re-attach.  Yep.  Still totally worth it.

Step 5.  Discover see through cellotape attaching lid to box.  Doh.  Feel I should write a stern letter to the makers telling them they should have a large warning such as 'Remove invisible film.  Do not attack with carving knives or chainsaws!  How many Ferrero Rocher accidents must there be?  (actually, I don't know if there have actually been any), but it's still a good question.

Step 6.  I'm in.  And have stopped at 4. 

St. 7.   5,  I'm going to stop at 5.  :)

 

HEED THE IDES OF MARCH

 

If I were a soothsayer, which I’m not, though I do on occasion have a hankering…..  I would say we were hurtling into a period of final acts, not just here in the UK as the investigation of a toddler who went missing abroad comes to close, but big showstopping finales, like the collapse of the inhumane facism regimes of the UK and the USA.  A change in the paradigm as information reaches the masses, and people power is realised.  An information revolution.  Numbers matter, they can force the abandonment of unpopular laws and appointments.  See Toby Young, who was in office for less time than Scaramucci.  In the old days, the said Toby Young would have blended in nicely with Theresa's cabinet of psychopaths, but his life is littered with a trail of repugnance that will never go away.  Some call it Karma.  

 

Democracy is tottering.  It CAN be interfered with, it is no longer the safest and only option.  The Russians demonstrated that targeting a specific demographic, can swing an election.  Momentum, and I love them, have demonstrated that by targeting specific constituencies they can unseat MPs. 

 

Trump's demographic might be as small as 30 something percent, but if they all turn up to vote, and they will, they can swing an election.  In a nutshell, ways have been found to shift the apathetic, all those who couldn't be arsed before.  Everyone carries a phone, every 5 minutes, 'did you go vote yet?'.  How do they know who to target?  We give away our likes, dislikes, preferences, age, weight, social status, etc, every time we log online or buy a bottle of wine.  As much as we the masses have access to information never seen before, so too do the authorities, the large corporations, the Keyhole Kates and the downright creepy.  Knowing everything about us, is a good guide as to how we will vote. 

 

But let's get back to the Ides of March.  Trump is on the brink, Theresa May, could spontaneously combust, but with grown ups Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell taking over, something can be salvaged from Brexit.  I have faith the US too have grown ups waiting in the wings. 

 

After the Ides of March, we will have a 'sweep up April' and a glorious May.  I am unashamedly a huge fan of Prince Harry and Meghan.  Yes, their exalted status, class, privilege, etc, etc, are inherently wrong, but isn't it possible they are just nice people?  For all my Marxist, revolutionary ideas, my heart went out to those two young boys who lost their mother, and aw shucks, I do shed a tear when I think how proud she would be. 

 

For many of my readers however, there still remains the huge question of how Operation Grange will conclude.  For that, another blog.  

 

 

 

 

 

Theresa methinks will be hung by her own petard, or one of those ghastly necklaces that remind us of how enchained she is to those billionaire puppet musters.  If I didn't hate her so vehemently I would send her a copy of Women Who Love Too Much.  And I'm playing fast and loose with the word 'love' there.

 

The Trump Show however, is history in the making.  The world has once again thrown up an absolute raving lunatic with the power to destabilise the whole planet.  And yes, I say planet, because Hitler only managed the world, had he realised there was a war to be had with Mother Earth, I'm sure he would have gone for it.  Trump is actually that deranged that someone could tell him there was a bigger planet out there, with lots more gold and lobotomised beauty queens and he would go take a look.  I bet Mike Myers now kicks himself for not making 'Goldmember' President.  

 

I read a great article the other day, (will find link) comparing Trump to Emperor Nero.  Apparently Nero used to tour Rome locking all the citizens in, in each town, so they were forced to watch him sing, dance and perform.  Followed by great applause and praise for how wonderful he was.  Guards would stand watch so no-one could climb out or over the gates.  If you have ever been to a bad show you would know how that feels.  Of course the punch line is, as Rome burned, Nero was asking 'so what did you think of my fiddling?' .Quite.

 

I don't see the Trump crime family lasting much longer than March.  This has been a huge knock in my faith in human nature.  I love Americans!  Just as much as my dear old Dad did - he was eternally grateful to them for stepping into WWII.  But he loved the whole US thing, the culture, the accents, the glamour, the music, the books, the courage. And by courage, he meant all those immigrants who had the guts to go start a new world.  But most of all the movies!  A love I always shared.  For the past year or so, I have believed you have a room of good guys like Steve McQueen, Henry Fonda and Marlon Brando somewhere, just waiting for a moment to take the bast'ard out.  Legally of course, a swine like Trump should stand trial for his crimes, the world needs an example of 'this should never happen again'.    

 

WHEN THE PROVERBIAL HITS THE FAN

Jim Gamble, Martin Brunt, Lorraine Kelly Carol Malone, four mainstream media pundits who believe Drs. Gerry and Kate McCann are too nice to be involved in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.  The latter 3 are of course professional pundits, journalists with a platform, whilst Jim Gamble is the unrivalled go to adviser on all matters relating to child protection and the new(ish) issue of trolls on social media. 

 

Jim Gamble of course has been closely involved with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from the very beginning.  As Head of CEOP at the time his agency were among the first to fly out to PDL to offer their assistance.  And in fact their profile of the likely abductor led to the naming of Robert Murat as an arguido and the seizing of his computer. 

 

Mr. Gamble, as Champion of the parents, must I am sure, be familiar with every aspect of this case,  yet as far as I know, he has never said specifically why he believes the former arguidos Gerry and Kate over the Portuguese Judiciary, other than they are not the kind of people who would commit a heinous crime.  So strong is his belief, that he appeared alongside them on breakfast television, presenting age progressed pictures of Madeleine as a white girl or an Asian and appealing for people to come forward and grass on their friends and neighbours.   

 

Turning to Martin Brunt, I have to say my heart went out to him when Brenda Leyland committed suicide.  I don't think he ever wanted something like that to happen.  But I just watched the documentary he made for the 10th anniversary, and he claims, and puts on a pretty good performance, of being genuinely baffled - despite the obvious being directly in front of his face.  I am so glad my loss of faith in human nature was realised in the summer of 2007, because for Martin et al, it's going to be one hell of shock. 

 

My heart will never go out to Carol Malone, the creature is evil personified, and I truly hope poor Brenda didn't read her 'fecked up bitch' column before she went to that lonely hotel room to end her life.  Carol has good reason to fear the internet, not the trolls, but the hundreds of bloggers who are a zillion times more interesting and entertaining than she is.  I'll pass on Lorraine Kelly.  She makes me want to hit the white lightning. 

 

Which brings us nicely to the big white elephant in the room, and the reason millions took to the internet when the British establishment absolved Gerry and Kate McCann on the basis that they were middle class professionals.  Those of us who thought we were all equal now, especially with a New Labour government were given a dramatic wake up call.  Because we all knew darn well, a family from a Council estate would never in a million years receive the kind of establishment support that was given to the parents of Madeleine.

 

And thus began the 'pro', 'anti', divide.  The'pros', the supporters of the parents, empathised with the child minding difficulties of the hard working professionals, The 'antis' dossing on the sofa watching Jeremy Kyle despised them.  Ergo, the 'antis' became the degenerate underclasses, whilst the 'pros' were elevated for their compassion and humanity.  They forgave Gerry and Kate without question, they'd all been there. 

 

The fact that Madeleine's disappearance became such a huge class issue shut discussion down.  Any critic of the parents was immediately branded a low life and jealous.  Their only reason for pointing out the facts in the police files was envy of Kate McCann's slender frame.  This ridiculous ploy would get you beaten up in a playground, but in the real world, bizarrely it worked.  Team McCann had won the media war.  Critics of the parents were not only silenced, they were run out of town.  Labelled haters and pitchforkers, no-one dared, even to this day, voice any suspicions about Gerry and Kate without incurring the wrath of the sanctimonious. 

 

Arguably, they were aided and abetted by one Tony Bennett, the angry, ugly face of a far right group of unhinged extremists who were portrayed as representative of thousands of ordinary people who simply weren't buying the load of baloney people like Martin Brunt (why, Martin, why?) and the Sun newspaper were selling us.   

 

Using the class issue was a good ploy, no-one wanted to be labelled a 'hater', or worse.  A pleb.  But the other big white elephant in the room, is the lengths that have been gone to, in order to cover up, or is it uncover? the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance.  The glee with which the BBC will pounce on a blue collar hotel worker as a potential suspect, but never the nice doctors whose apartment had traces of cadaver odour and blood. They bend over backwards and sidewards like contortionists to avoid the bleeding obvious.  Bizarre. 

 

When you make a mistake how far are you prepared to continue with that mistake before admitting you were wrong?  The answer to that question I think will come in early 2018, when I am sure the inordinate lengths some people have gone to, to maintain the 'mystery' around this case will be revealed.  For the moment we will have to continue watching journalists and crime experts continue to make giant asses of themselves because they are too lazy or too stupid to read beyond the press releases handed to them to by spin doctors. 

 

Will the collective excuse be naivety?  Wails in the night of 'how could I have been that stupid?'  And, we hope, 'why did I think it was alright to leave babies and toddlers on their own'.  Or maybe, 'why did I scold those who pointed out how dangerous it was'?  I'm playing of course.  It's more likely to be the fault of the plebs, at least they [the 'PLUs'] didn't think badly of Gerry and Kate, just because they had a nice house and room for a pony. 

 

If there were any justice in the world, and if the case of missing Madeleine was not so small in the whole scheme of things, there would be a Public Inquiry.  Questions like, why was the British Prime Minister interfering in a criminal investigation in Portugal?  Who gave the order for the Portuguese police to treat the parents with kid gloves?  Why did the MSM take over protecting the McCanns when the Government stepped back? 

 

I'm not going to ask questions of this present government, for the moment, I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.  Not because they are the good guys, but because their hands are clean.  It wasn't they, or their Consuls asking the PJ to go easy on the Brits.  David Cameron had a good relationship with the Portuguese, and his inner imperialist would feel a sense of duty to put right the wrongs of his socialist predecessors. 

Operation Grange is entering it's seventh (?) year, and is said to end in March 2018.  They have of course kept their options open, but 'another lead' is already sounding pretty thin over decade on.  Had there been an abduction option, I think it would have closed long ago.  Unfortunately, this was a puzzle with the main framework in place - only the truth will fit.    

 

THE RELUCTANT DIETER

 

Reasons to get fit and lose weight

1.  You feel better mentally and physically. 
2.  You have more energy, all those jobs you have put off for months, get done.
3.  Half naked men on building sites whistle at you - from a distance or
     from behind.  Do not turn around or they recoil in horror. 
4.  You can dig out all your showstopping outfits from the past.
5.  You can gloat as you walk towards the rows of 10s and 12s in Matalan
6.  You can wear a big sloppy jumper without looking like Grizzly Adams.
7.  The talking scales don't tell you 'one at a time'.
8.  You get endless praise from those around you, even if you do have to
     parade around several times, and hold up all your 'before' clothes.

The list of course is endless, and mostly not shallow like above, and it's here to convince myself as much as those who I hope will come and join me.  This is a slimming club like no other.  No fees, no weigh ins, no shaming of those who forgot to mention the sausage roll, the bar of fruit of nut or the slug of vodka they chucked in their smoothie. 

Please buy the book, it is an enjoyable read and the diet really does work.  Please read the reviews, it's been tried and tested.  Not only is it the simplest diet you will ever embark on, it is the cheapest, no fancy foods, no gym membership, just simple changes that can be incorporated into anyone's life. 

This will be an ongoing page, please enjoy the book and come back and let me know how you are getting on.  As much as I love Jane Fonda, for me the morning of 2nd January will begin with raw eggs and 7 minutes of mad dancing to Nothing Going on But the Rent.  I'll let you know how I get on ;)

________________________________


Whilst I wholeheartedly agree that the words diet and exercise should be not be mentioned during the period between Christmas and New Year, I bring you the easiest, quickest, laziest and I want a cream doughnut diet, you could ever wish for in your Christmas stocking.  This will relieve you of all the guilt you might feel for tucking into another turkey sandwich and the last ferrero rocher.  Come January 2nd, you can be relieved of that spare tyre within a month!  

 

It is second time around for The Reluctant Dieter for good reason!  Read the reviews.  This is the diet for those who can’t (and won’t) stick to other diets, and who’s last attempts at exercise was hand jiving. It’s based on the kind of food that is available to all of us all the time, eg a tin of beans rather than a handful of goji beans and pine nuts.  It’s easy, it works for those looking for short cuts and minimum work, and those who think it is their divine right to have a treat. Quite right.

 

I guarantee the diet works, as it worked for me, the weight was literally falling off at half a stone a week.  And before the doom mongers rush in with their health risk warnings, I was the healthiest I had been for years and my doctor’s advice was ‘whatever you are doing, keep on doing it’.  

 

Apart from being the most fun diet you will ever do, and the easiest to keep to, the book is a good giggle!  I’m afraid I have an irreverent approach to, well, everything.  Not for me pushing truck tyres uphill, or munching through a bucketful of grated carrots, the smug slim people want us to admire their suffering, but there's no real need for it. 

 

Unfortunately, 3, or is it 4 years on, I have not stuck to it as religiously as I should.  Ergo, come January 2^nd, I too begin again, and hope that others will join me on this page, so we can encourage each other and keep track of our progress!  Please share this link on your facebook and twitter pages - trust me your friends and family will thank you.  Even if they don't want to lose weight, they will still enjoy a great laugh. 
 

 

Meanwhile, I am trying to get drunk on a box of cherry liquor chocolates, it’s not working and I’m feeling a tad nauseous, but I have managed to convince myself that the cherry inside is one of my 5 a day! 

 

 

  

Ps. I do not recommend cherry liquors in book. 

 

 

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B00RNV3PC4/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_paging_btm_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&pageNumber=1

 

£2.39 Amazon

Free on Kindle Unlimited.

 

 

Pps.  When reading the reviews, please bear in mind that I am plagued with stalkers who trash everything I do.  Most of the reviews happily, from the verified purchasers especially, are, I hope more accurate.  And if you enjoy the book, please take a moment to write a review, it would be much appreciated.