But first, a little background.
The date: Wednesday, 28 April 2010 post title: You Just Could Not Make It Up
(Gerry McCann) He said: "It's not right that an innocent, vulnerable British citizen is essentially given up on.
"And I don't think it's right that as parents, that we have to drive the search.
Priceless, absolutely priceless.
And how he loves to take the piss."I mean logically I can't say, I mean none of us can say for definite other than the people involved.......
And the "Comprehensive Review" I think that's a euphemism for his muckers (friends) doing a snow job.
I can see it now, on the notepaper of some dodgy police authority, co-signed at the bottom by McCann's new best best friend Jim Gamble, "This boy really did loose his homework"
Only he didn't, and it wasn't his homework.
Oh to be in England now that Spring is here. Blah blah article.
I am re-upping this earlier post because it highlights the more odious goings on of the UK media.
The date: Saturday, 22 October 2011: Post title: Imagine
I am posting the few lines below, just as I found them.
If it was the writers intention, and I'm pretty sure it was, it is the last sentence of the article that is the essence of the post.
It screams, well to me it does. Just who, and how many, were involved in directing the judge to grant an injunction prohibiting the sale of Goncalo Amaral's book, A Verdade de Mentira?
Books simply do not get banned in a European democracy in the twenty first century.
They simply don't. And they don't get banned for the unbelievably pathetic reasons that were proffered by the McCanns.
As equally, the government of a country, does not treat, or allow to be treated, by itself or by the scum of Europe, one of its Nationals in a manner described in the article, and that can only be described as appalling, Not if it has an ounce of pride it doesn't.
And not when they (the establishment) know in their heart of hearts, that the fellow was right all along.
Let us forget now for a moment, all that has preceded a quite recent event, the 'Review' by the Metropolitan Police. Because it is from a British perspective that the whole thing reads like a bad play. The governing power of the United Kingdom has undertaken to review the files at the behest of the two people who are to this day, the only persons of interest regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
You simply just could not make it up, no matter how hard you tried.
And if anyone is expecting something positive out of this review, don't, it isn't going to happen.
Via Joana Morais
by Aníbal Ferreira
22nd Jan 2010.
Imagine you had been a police officer for 30 years and that you were investigating the disappearance of a little English girl named Maddie McCann.
Imagine that all the police officers, including you, concluded that the little girl had died and that the parents were suspects of being involved in concealing the body.
Imagine that the little girl’s parents were made official suspects and that the English press started to call you “bungling cop”, “amateur”, “corrupted”, “inept”, “incompetent” and “failure”.
Imagine that the English press started to announce on a daily basis that you had “manufactured the case”, “made stuff up”, “”ditched vital evidence”, “hampered the investigation”, that you were “biased”, “cruel” and “lying”.
Imagine that for month after month, the English press called you “fat”, “drunk”, “torturer”, “stupid”, “imbecile” and “infamous”, repeating 418 times that you were a “disgraced” man and that the mother of your children was a “prostitute”.
Imagine that the police’s political directory did not defend you and that, quite to the contrary, it took the case investigation away from you, allowing for the English press to print the headline “Sacked!” and to renew all previous attacks with increased violence.
Imagine that the Public Ministry declared that the process would wait for the production of better evidence and that said statement was understood in England as an “acquittal” of the little girl’s parents, prompting even more attacks from the press against the “bungling cop”, “amateur” and “corrupt”, who “manufactured the case”, “made stuff up” and “ditched vital evidence”.
Have you imagined all of this? Well, then answer this question: IF YOU COULD WRITE A BOOK TO DEFEND YOUR REPUTATION, WOULD YOU WRITE IT?
Now imagine that the book was taken off the market because it damaged the little girl’s parents’ reputation. Imagine
The same few words that I employed above, the introduction for the Imagine article, I also went on to make use of to introduce a post: Date: Wednesday, 26 October 2011 Post title: Home Secretary Perhaps You Might Care To Review This: Re-Up
It is far too large to import here, but it deals primarily with previous Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, Jim Gamble and the CEOP's, "Behavioural Analysis Unit" and not least the body language of the Doctors McCann.
It is as I say, a large post, but if you haven't read it, you may find it quite enlightening.
Moving towards the crux of the matter, the recent revelations of La Brooks at the Leveson inquiry. It might be an opportune moment to offer our current Home Secretary, Theresa May, a small apology for any previous stick that I may have given her. Because due to the same Rebecca Brooks revelations, it becomes increasingly apparent that Theresa May doesn't run the Home Office, rather it's La Brooks and the Devil incarnate Rupert Murdoch.
Much the same I suppose, can be said for Number 10. But then we knew that already, prior to the recent disclosure of the Brooks/Murdoch edict, via the front page of The Sun.
But what we didn't know prior to Brook's appearance at the Leveson inquiry, were the far from subtle techniques employed by Brooks when meeting the Champion of Chipping Norton, our own dear Prime Minister, David Cameron. 'Do as I say or else!' or words to that effect.
It was for no reason that Robert Jay reiterated his question to Brooks, and I quote:
Robert Jay: Unless the Prime Minister ordered the review by the Metropolitan Police, the Sun would put the Home Secretary, Theresa May, on the front page until the Sun's demands were met?
Denied by Brooks of course, but her obvious use of semantics, "I did not say blah blah' was immediately picked up by Leveson who went on to ask her to define how she would describe the situation. I will say no more of this exchange, it can all be found in this excellent little video compilation, courtesy of Hi De Ho
All in all, not one of La Brooks more polished performances, the cynical amongst you might even think she was being economical with the actuality.
Of John Redwood, the Met, and the review itself, I have already made my thoughts clear on that little pantomime. Preferring as I do, unlike the Met, to hang on to any credibility that I may have, rather than start to argue about 'leads' from psychics and soothsayers. No matter how many they are purported to be.
A little more on Cameron, May and the review below the video, and a little something that sheds further light on the relationship between Murdoch, the police and the McCanns.
Update: Joana Morais has much on this.
Call Me Dave but Watch Your Back (Theresa) May 22, 2011
If I were Home Secretary and had been stabbed in the back by Cameron for cheap political gain, I think I might be issuing an edict to a few senior plod, bring me the truth not a whitewash.
That's assuming I still had any credibility left of course.
Overruled at the behest of a couple of chavs, this politicking, it's not all beer and skittles is it Therasa? more
The McCann Connection: Now I See July 20, 2011
At the very end of the article below, the writer, Peter Burden, asks:If the MPs had asked Yates if he knew who sponsored the Annual Police Bravery awards, I wonder if they would have been surprised to hear that it is in fact the Screws stable-mate, the Sun,
Well, I can't speak for the MPs, but I'm most certainly surprised to be made aware of this little nugget. And having been made aware of it; my, how things do drop into place.
What am I talking about? Probably the most singular bizarre incident in the whole of the Madeleine McCann affair, even more bizarre than Jim Gamble's unequivocal support of Kate and Gerry McCann, the appearance of Gerry McCann as guest of honour at the NPIA's Annual Police Bravery awards; sponsors, as we now know, News International.
Before the article in question, two brief histories.
Madeleine's father hails UK police Friday, 13 Jul 2007
The father of missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann has praised the "sterling work" of police officers and detectives in the UK.
Speaking at the National Police Federation annual bravery awards last night, Gerry McCann said the role of police forces was "often not appreciated until you really need their help".
Leaving his wife Kate and two young twins behind in Portugal, Mr McCann has flown to Britain to talk to police involved in the search for his daughter. She remains missing after being abducted from her bed while she slept at a holiday resort in Praia da Luz, the Algarve, on May 3rd.
He will also visit the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre later today to discuss their role in aiding Portuguese police find Madeleine.
At last night's award ceremony, attended by Prince Charles, Mr McCann received a standing ovation from police officers, which he described as a "humbling" experience.
"The vast majority of [police officers] that I managed to speak to are, like us, very optimistic that we will find Madeleine safe and well," he wrote later on his online blog. more- - -
And this from the inimitable Blackwatch.The article in question, from 2009 no less. And only discovered in researching an article to come, on Yates of the Yard misuse of public funds in hiring Carter-Ruck in an attempt to gag solicitor Mark Lewis. But more of that later.
Grooming the McCanns: Amber Alert, the Prüm Treaty and Government Interference in the McCann Case
Author Blackwatch 12/08/2009
How The Madeleine Case Supported the Extension of Amber Alert System and the EU's Prüm Treaty To The Remaining 27 Member States - And How Downing Street Obliged
In response to the question, how will the McCanns be remembered, one Mirror Forum member wrote:
“they will become a leading force in the world to get rid of the hidden evil in our society, and to out those who try to cover up for the tragedies these criminals can cause”.
For a couple who were at this time suspects in their daughter's disappearance, the statement brokered something of a paradox; just how could these two ordinary individuals who had been openly pilloried for their routine negligence transform themselves into credible figureheads for law-enforcement overnight? Within the time it took to finish one glass of wine and discover one of your children missing, the McCanns exchanged their prison-issue denims for outfits tailored to a more 'practical' design.
And what at first had sounded like a most absurd suggestion by one deluded forum member steadily acquired some semblance of authority.
GERRY IS HONOURED AT POLICE BRAVERY AWARDS FOR A LIFETIME (WELL 6 WEEKS OR SO) OF SERVICES TO … MISSING KIDS AND STUFF ... JULY 2007
Retracing our steps to mid-July 2007 and we find ourselves standing alongside hundreds of dumbfounded uniformed officers at the Dorchester Hotel, invited from our seats by senior personnel to applaud one Gerald P McCann at the Police Bravery Awards. First we’d had the poignant video of his daughter, then the speech praising both UK Officers and the Polícia Judiciária, now we had the standing ovation. And for what? Just what were we honouring? Gerry’s contribution to ‘what’ exactly? One of the serving South Yorkshire officers receiving an award there that night described it as one of the most surreal events of his life. Sitting at his table was none other than Gerry McCann, 1500 metre junior running medallist and celebrated kidnap personality. And he wasn’t just down on the guest-list; Gerry was guest of honour. It was like having Mark Stanley - the man responsible for shutting the doors on the Herald of Free Enterprise as it left Zeebrugge - guest-of honour at the annual Maritime and Coastguard awards.
Naturally, not even this prepared us for what was to come. But just how did we get to this stage?
I HAVE A DREAM – GERRY’S EPIPHANY – FIRST WE TAKE MANHATTAN THEN WE TAKE BERLIN
In mid-June, in an interview given to the Catholic newspaper, The Tablet, Gerry McCann told of an "extraordinary experience" inside the church in Praia da Luz just days after Madeleine's disappearance:
"I had this mental image of being in a tunnel and instead of the light at the end of the tunnel being extremely narrow and a distant spot, the light opened up and the tunnel got wider and wider and went in many different directions .... I can't say it was a vision because I am not clear what a vision is but I had a mental image and it certainly helped me decide. I became a man possessed that night. The next day I was up at dawn, making phone calls."
At this point in time Madeleine has been missing, presumed abducted, for little more than 3 weeks. But in what can only be described as an epiphany or profound breakthrough, Gerry McCann is sufficiently inspired and transformed enough to pursue a totally new direction. At a time when most people in his position are coming round from the effects of a mild sedative Gerry decides to resign his position at Glenfield Hospital and spearhead a campaign on behalf of missing and exploited children everywhere. His mission starts modestly enough; a meeting with SOS Crianca, the main child welfare non-governmental organisation in Portugal and then to London for a meeting at the Headquarters of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre. And then things start getting a little giddy. Gerry visits the National Centre for Missing & Exploited Children in Washington, bonds with the US attorney general Gonzales at the justice department, grapples at the White House with the First Lady's deputy chief of staff, Sarah Armstrong and follows it up with a mid-afternoon jog up Capitol Hill for meetings with Democrat congressman Nick Lampson and Republican Senator Robert Shelby.
And then, of course, we have that ill-timed appointment in Edinburgh with Kirsty Wark who interviews Gerry at the Edinburgh International TV festival, shortly before he and his wife are declared formal suspects.
Not bad for a couple from Leicester who were presumed reckless enough to leave their daughter unattended for several nights of the week on a jolly old Summer Holiday with their mates in Portugal. There is a great deal more to this article which can be found here.- - -
MET ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER JOHN YATES DENIES THE BLEEDING OBVIOUS
September 7th, 2009
A curious, alarming anomaly was revealed last Wednesday during a session of the Commons Culture, Media, Sport Committee. A very senior police officer told the committee that while investigating the News of the World phone-tapping incident, an unequivocal piece of evidence had not convinced his officers that it required further investigation.
This evidence was the now infamous email sent from junior screws hack, Ross Hall (AKA Hindley) to contract private investigator, Glenn Mulcaire, which said: ‘This is the transcript for Neville,’ with the transcript of a message left on the voicemail of Gordon Taylor, boss of the PFA, intercepted and recorded by Mulcaire.
Mulcaire pleaded guilty to hacking into Taylor’s voicemail after he’d also admitted to hacking into the voicemails of members of the Clarence House staff. He was jailed for these offences (which the News of the World encouraged him to commit by giving him a special contract signed by former Screws news editor, Greg Miskiw), and he served his sentence.
The Metropolitan Police investigation, headed by Detective Chief Superintendent Philip Williams, decided that despite the email’s clear reference to senior Screws hack, Neville Thurlbeck, clearly connecting him to an illegally acquired phone message, there was no basis for questioning Thurlbeck. There was, they said, no evidence to put to him or any other News of the World staff whose names had cropped in connection with this entirely unroyal-related hacking.
If this seems strangely lacking in diligence on their part, it seems even more so after hearing evidence given to the committee, after the police had appeared, by Mark Lewis, the lawyer who successfully sued the News of the World on behalf of Gordon Taylor. We learned from him that after he had acquired a court order requesting documentary evidence of Taylor’s complaint from the Metropolitan Police, Detective Sergeant Mark Maberly told Lewis that he “wasn’t having everything, but we’ll give you enough to hang the News of the World over Gordon Taylor”.
This statement, as reported by Lewis is unequivocal, and it’s out of the question that he would dissemble in front of a Parliamentary Committee. Besides, the Screws offered a £1m to shut Taylor up before the case got to court, so the evidence clearly was damning (for they had denied any knowledge of the offence until Lewis produced the Met’s evidence).
Why on earth didn’t the Met choose to prosecute the paper themselves when they had such a clear case? Lewis’s evidence makes a nonsense of what Asst Com Yates had told the committee only half and hour before. He should be called in again to explain himself.
The police had been asked by one of the MPs about their relationship with the News of the World. Not surprisingly Yates offered some weasel stuff about needing to a have a relationship with such an “important newspaper”.
If the MPs had asked Yates if he knew who sponsored the Annual Police Bravery awards, I wonder if they would have been surprised to hear that it is in fact the Screws stable-mate, the Sun, and the News International top brass all attend this lavish ceremony each year, including of course Rebekah (née Wade) Brooks now CEO of News International, and, no doubt, a good friend of the Met brass-hats. [see: http://www.peterburden.net/archives/280 ] And I’ve long wondered why the Met have so often gone along with some of the absurdly fanciful ‘criminal investigations’ spun out of nowhere by Screws star, Mazher Mahmood. Peter Burden.net