"The 'pyjamas' have always bothered me"

"The 'pyjamas' have always bothered me."

I quote the researcher and compiler of this quite extraordinary piece of research. And it is, as anybody who has ever undertaken such a task would readily agree, not least me. I do know the time and effort that goes into projects such as this. So to researcher and compiler, Maren, from The Netherlands, a more than well deserved tip of the hat.

 "The 'pyjamas' have always bothered me."  I know the feeling well, only with me it is the "Jemmied Shutters" that weren't and the "Curtains" that have been both open, closed, and depending on which McCann version of events you read, flapping in the wind; or not. (The Window: Kate McCann's Red Herring)

I won't take up much more of your time, but I have to reiterate a question that I have asked on more than a few previous occasions. (Bottom of page)

Had the McCanns shall we say, been suspected of robbing a Post Office, and given such contradictory testaments, as we know them to have done; just how far do you think they would have got?

Testaments, not just contradictory, but on many occasions, diametrically opposite to what had been uttered previously by this scurrilous pair.

Conflicting testaments, not just overlooked by the police, I have to say, but totally ignored. And one cannot help but ask the question, why? It is after all, the fate of a three year old we are talking about here, not the unauthorised withdrawal of a few money tokens, from our aforementioned Post Office.

What we must never loose sight of, are the "Jemmied Shutters" that weren't. The cornerstone on which the McCann's built their argument for "stranger abduction" was the jemmied shutters. No jemmied shutters, no abduction. It's that simple.

Introduction

May 3/4, 2007. It starts with white pyjamas.

Kate and Gerry McCann called family and friends.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id28.html

October 14, 2013. It ends with long-sleeved white pyjamas,
as witnessed by Aoife Smith and which can be seen in BBC1 reconstruction, October 14, 2013.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyJwns_MTok
(at the 23:56 mark)

In the meantime, for more than six years, the world is overdosed and brainwashed with Eeyore’s white bottoms with a floral pattern and a frill at the end, and a short-sleeved pink top. Backed up by Jane Tanner’s sighting, as far as a man carrying a child and the pyjama bottoms is concerned.

It is almost as if we had to look for Eeyore pyjamas instead of a real, living and findable little girl.

http://gerrymccannsblogs.info/2009/03/message-from-gerry-and-kate-2/

Mathew Oldfield, the most malleable of the group ("get down to reception and see what’s happening with the police!") and Jane Tanner, the most vulnerable, become the foundations of the fairy story. As always Kate & Gerry McCann work from behind the scenes.

http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.de/2013/10/light-and-dark.html

Next comments: a sort of pyjamas history.




May 3, 2007

The telephone rang at around 11pm [03 May] at Trish Cameron's home near Glasgow. She picked it up to hear the voice of her younger brother. "He was distraught, breaking his heart," Mrs Cameron said. "He said: 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted.'

...the little girl they had left asleep in her white pyjamas, had disappeared.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/05/world.sandralaville#article_continue


May 4, 2007

Jill Renwick, a family friend, told GMTV at 7:45am, on the morning of 04 May, that the distraught parents were certain that Madeleine had been abducted. "They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour."

Speaking to the BBC later, Ms Renwick said ...

Ms Renwick described the missing girl as a "very pretty, very blonde three-year-old". Madeline was said to have been wearing white pyjamas when she went missing.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/may/04/markoliver


May 4, 2007, at 11.15am
Witness statement of Gerald Patrick McCann

At the time of her disappearance she was wearing pyjamas, the trousers were white with a floral pattern, and the short-sleeved top was predominantly pink and there was a blue and grey figure of a donkey on the front, with the inscription "Eeyore".

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm


May 4, 2007, at 11.30am
Witness statement of Jane Michelle Tanner

About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.

As regards these details, she does not know what Madeleine was wearing at the moment of her disappearance, because she did not talk to anyone about this. As she concerns the man she saw, she only spoke to Gerald about this, not entering into details, and to the police.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm


May 4, 2007, 12:01AM BST
The Telegraph publishes first report of Madeleine's disappearance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550571/Three-year-old-feared-abducted-in-Portugal.html


May 4, at 14.20am
Witness statement of Kate Marie Healy

At the time of her disappearance, she was wearing pyjamas with white bottoms with a floral pattern. The short-sleeved top, mainly pink with a blue-grey figure of a donkey bearing the inscription, "EEYORE", an inscription which is also on one of the trouser legs. The pyjamas are "Marks and Spencer" brand.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm


May 7, 2007
BBC News

About 50 volunteers have been helping to search the area for signs of the girl, including the clothes she was wearing when she vanished.

Her family confirmed she was wearing white pyjama bottoms with a small floral design and a short-sleeved pink top with a picture of Winnie the Pooh character Eeyore.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6631255.stm


May 8, 2007

The direct appeal was the idea of Mrs McCann and her husband, Gerry, rather than of the Portuguese police. The couple also released a description of the pyjamas Madeleine had been wearing when she was taken as her parents dined at a nearby tapas bar. In contrast to normal British police procedure, Portuguese officers did not issue a description of Madeleine's clothing.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/may/08/ukcrime.madeleinemccann


May 8, 2007
BBC News

Madeleine's family have confirmed she was wearing white pyjama bottoms with a small floral design and a short-sleeved pink top with a picture of Winnie the Pooh character Eeyore when she disappeared.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6635463.stm


May 9, 2007

She was wearing white pyjama bottoms with a small floral design and a short-sleeved pink top with a picture of Eeyore on it when she vanished.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-453659/British-paedophile-links-investigated-Madeleine-hunt.html


May 10, 2007
BBC news
Kevin Bakhurst

We passed on the accurate details of Madeleine's pyjamas, at the family's request, correcting the police's [?] initial description.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2007/05/avoiding_intrusion.html


May 10, 2007
Items of clothing found locally did not belong to Madeleine, he said. A picture of the pyjamas she was wearing when she vanished has been released.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6644615.stm


May 10, 2007

Some volunteer search teams had been operating under the assumption that Madeleine was wearing white pyjamas, when they were in fact a pink t-shirt with the character Eeyore and white trousers with a small floral pattern.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-454029/Search-Madeleine--police-release-pyjamas-wearing.html


May 10, 2007
Witness statement of Gerald Patrick McCann,

Only about 01h00 on 4 May 2007 did he learn through RUSSELL that his companion, JANE, at 21h10, could have seen an individual crossing the top of the road with a child in his arms, that may or may not have been his daughter MADELEINE. Asked, he relates that he does not recall to have described exactly the type of pyjamas (colour, designs, etc.) that MADELEINE had worn at the time she disappeared.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm


May 10, 2007
Witness statement of Jane M. Tanner

Subsequently, she had no doubts that it could have been MBM because, through conversations with Fiona Payne in which Fiona Payne described the pyjamas that MBM had worn that night, which coincided with those she had seen. Questioned why she had not commented to KH [Kate Healy] what she had seen that night, namely that she had seen a male individual who carried a child with pink pyjamas, she relates that she always avoided making this comment to the McCanns so as not to torture them more in their suffering.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm


May 15, 2007

"Kate dressed Amelie in her sister's pyjamas and the baby said: 'Maddy's jammies. Where is Maddy?' But she is too young to understand. And how do you explain?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/05/14/1178995077373.html?page=3


May 17, 2007

Many toys have been tied to the railings of the war memorial, including characters from Winnie the Pooh, as Madeleine was wearing Eeyore pyjamas when she disappeared.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/leicester/content/image_galleries/madeleine_mccann_rothley_gallery.shtml?5


May 26, 2007
Witness Aoife Smith

She did not see the child's face because she was lying against the individual's left shoulder in a vertical position against the individual.

There was nothing covering the child, a comforter/blanket or any other piece of clothing but she only saw her back.

She was wearing light trousers, white or light pink, that may have been pyjamas.

She also had a light top, with long sleeves.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm


June 4, 2007

New Madeleine TV appeal BBC News video
BBC Crimewatch
Recorded in Praia da Luz: 04 June 2007, Televised: 05 June 2007 Transcript by Nigel Moore

Kate McCann: "These are virtually identical to the pyjamas that Madeleine was wearing when she was taken. As you can see it's a pink top, errm... with gathered short sleeves and it has a picture of Eeyore on the front. Errr, the bottoms are white with a... a floral design and have an Eeyore, errm... on the bottom of the right leg."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id185.html


June 5, 2007

But, of course, the pyjamas she was holding so carefully in her lap were not Madeleine's, but those of Madeleine's younger sister, two-year-old Amelie.

Smiling wanly, Mrs McCann looked down at the pyjamas in her lap and added: "These are virtually identical, but these are little bit smaller because they are Amelie's."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-459927/Madeleine-Exhausted-McCanns-Crimewatch-TV-appeal.html


June 6, 2007
McCanns Appeal for Help in Germany

The McCanns hold up pyjamas similar to those their daughter was wearing the night she was abducted.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/mccanns-appeal-for-help-in-germany-madeleine-s-parents-deny-role-in-abduction-a-487079.html


June 7, 2007
The McCanns hold up a set of pyjamas similar to those worn by Madeleine.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-460119/Madeleine-There-way-involved-abduction-say-parents.html


September 6, 2007, at 3.00pm
Witness statement of Kate Marie Healy

She noticed a stain, supposedly of tea, on Madeleine’s pyjama top, which she washed a little later that same morning. She hung it out to dry on a small stand, and it was dry by the afternoon. Madeleine sometimes drank tea; nevertheless the stain did not appear during breakfast, maybe it happened another day, as Madeleine did not have tea the previous night and the stain was dry.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html#sta6


September 19, 2007

But the McCanns say the fluids probably came from Madeleine's unwashed pyjamas and sandals which were carried in the boot when the family was moving apartments.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddys-mum-why-im-innocent-506983


April 8, 2008
Jane Tanner - Record Of Tape Recorded Interview

So I'd spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I'd seen.

01.04.52 4078 "Sorry, was that on the night that Madeleine had disappeared?"
Reply "That was at three o'clock in the morning after she'd disappeared, yeah".

4078 "So when you went into Gerry and Kate's apartment who else was there?"
Reply "I think there was Russ, I think Russell came with me and there was Sylvie who was the translator. I can't remember which, there was some, there was a PJ chap was sitting on the, by the table. And there was Gerry who was standing by the, the bedroom door".

4078 “And how was Gerry at that point?”
Reply “Oh he was just, well obviously, obviously distraught. And I think it was quite hard for me to be saying at that, you know, looking in his face and to be explaining what I’d seen, at that point was quite hard because, you know, Gerry was obviously standing there, I don’t know whether, and you sort of think ‘Oh God, here’s me, if I’d tried to stop them this wouldn’t have happened’ sort of thing.

I think, just going back a bit, over again, this is something, I think when I realised the true significance of what I’d seen as well was almost like a couple of days afterwards when, erm, erm, I was talking to Fi about the pyjamas, because again it seems madness now why I hadn’t asked Kate and Gerry before this what the pyjamas were like, but it’s all sort of rha rha, you know, so I didn’t know what, what Madeleine’s pyjamas were before this. And I’d actually read in a paper that they were white, it was in the Telegraph, I think it was the day afterwards Dianne had bought a Telegraph paper and in there it was saying she was wearing plain white pyjamas, so I think when I read that I almost thought ‘Oh maybe I have got it wrong’, you know, because I’d, out of everything, I thought ‘Oh they weren’t just plain white’, I thought they had got some sort of thing on it. So I think it might have actually been the next morning, which would probably be the Saturday morning, I think I said something to, about oh, to Fi ‘Oh what were the pyjamas like’ and she actually described the pyjamas and she sort of said ‘Oh no that is what they were like’. And that was, I think that was almost the moment when I couldn’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that, you know.

“With, with a turn up, and the turn up I mean I can’t stress this enough, that is the bit that makes me think so much that it is the same pyjamas.”

“Okay, so you think it was pink but you accept that it may not have been, the colour may have been distorted or it might have been such the power of suggestion I suppose.”
Jane Tanner: “That could have been that for me because the pyjamas I really tried to, it was in the interview the next day when they really pushed me you know I think you call it cognitive interview or whatever, really pushed me to get an idea of you know more details about the person and it was then that you know sort of the description of the pyjamas was more in my head than I’d initial, it was mainly the feet as an initial thing.”

“Yes. I think the point they’re trying to make is that you had no knowledge of what Madeleine was supposed to have been wearing when you gave that description”?
Reply “No I think, no because when, I wasn’t there at the table when Kate gave a you know, I think Kate gave everybody else, when she came, you know when everyone was looking for her, they had a description of what to look for but I wasn’t, I was in the room at that point so no I definitely didn’t know what she’d, and I’d never seen her in pyjamas, I’ve never seen Madeleine in pyjamas at home and or anywhere so”.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm 


April 11, 2008

RECORD OF TAPE RECORDED INTERVIEW DAVID PAYNE

you know I can't remember exactly what, what you know the night attire, what the children were wearing but white was the predominant err colour

And really didn’t think twice about it at the time and that’s why it wasn’t mentioned then. But she [Jane Tanner] definitely mentioned it to me you know after Madeleine had been abducted and you know on the, the following day before she’d actually mentioned it to Kate and there was a, a newspaper report, I think it was in the Telegraph err certainly one of the newspapers anyway, that was sort of describing err Madeleine’s pyjamas and, and err Jane said that’s not right, how did they get that, well she said you know, that in, I don’t know how they get that information anyway, my recollections were this was what she was wearing and described it you know differently you know to what the, the, the press had, and that was before she’d even seen Kate so you know, the strength of that argument is just absolutely overwhelming, you know given the time frame err you know of when Madeleine must have gone, gone, that you know and for her to have described in detail the pull ups at the bottom of the pyjamas err you know the colours, you know and the timing is just, you know well, so.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm


 April 30, 2008

Mrs McCann stayed in a bedroom praying. She said: It was really cold. I knew what pyjamas she had on and I just thought she’s going to be freezing.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/1908158/Madeleine-McCann-left-alone-as-last-minute-decision.html


2009 and 2010
No pyjamas?


 May 7, 2011

In extracts printed by The Sun, she tells of how windy it was, and says she kept imagining how cold Madeleine would be in her short-sleeved Eeyore pyjamas, and wishing she’d had her warmer Barbie pyjamas on.

http://dailym.ai/iWtyc1


May 8, 2011

I ran out into the car park of our holiday apartment, flying from end to end, yelling desperately: 'Madeleine! Madeleine!' It was so cold and so windy. I kept picturing her in her short-sleeved Marks & Spencer Eeyore pyjamas and feeling how chilled she would be.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/may/08/madeleine-maccann-mother-suicidal-thoughts


May 8, 2011

As everyone started to search she ran into the car park shouting Madeleine’s name. She added: “It was so cold and windy. I kept picturing her in her short-sleeved Marks & Spencer Eeyore pyjamas and feeling how chilled she would be. Fear was shearing through my body.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-little-brother-promises-127306


May 9, 2011

Her final few minutes with Madeleine are forever etched in her memory.

Madeleine, in her Marks & Spencer Eeyore pyjamas, nuzzling her toy Cuddle Cat beneath a ‘princess’ blanket ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1384977/Kate-McCanns-haunting-account-makes-rue-day-I-doubted-them.html


May 9, 2011
Published in The Sun

Although Jane had never seen or known about Madeleine's Eeyore pyjamas, her description of this child's night clothes matched Madeleine's almost exactly.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/SUN1_09_05_2011.htm


May 12, 2011
In book Madeleine by Kate McCann.

"The police did not appear to feel that Jane’s sighting in Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva and the man and child reported by the Irish holidaymakers in Rua da Escola Primaria were related. They seem to have concluded that these were in all likelihood two different men carrying two different children (if, they implied, these two men actually existed at all). The only reason for their skepticism appeared to be an unexplained time lapse between the two sightings. They didn’t dovetail perfectly. To me, the similarities seem far more significant than any discrepancy in timing".

"(…remember – Jane’s description had not been released to the public before the Irish witnesses made their statements), I am staggered by how alike they are, almost identical in parts.


May 16, 2011

The only other unexplained detail I remember from that morning was a large, brown stain I noticed on Madeleine's pink Eeyore pyjama top. It looked like a tea stain.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/a-familys-never-ending-ordeal/story-e6frg6z6-1226056322286


May 17, 2011

I didn't think of it at the time but the day Madeleine disappeared I noticed what I thought was a tea stain on her Disney pyjama top,' she says. 'I washed it without thinking but looking back, the children hadn’t drunk any tea that day and I can't remember her mentioning that she'd spilt anything.'

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/49may11/WOMAN_17_05_2011.htm


 June 21, 2011
Interview McCanns in the Netherlands

At the 1:19 mark

Question: He kept the child in his arms?

Kate McCann answers: He was carrying the child [Gerry tries to interrupt] across his arms, like this. You would think he might carry the child ... the shoulder, but he was carrying the child like this.

Gerry McCann: Jane didn’t know what Madeleine was wearing ...
She also described the pyjamas, ... remarkably similar... and she didn’t know that, and another really key thing is, later on that evening, probably about forty minutes later, an Irish family saw a man and they gave an almost identical description of the man and the child.

http://www.hartvannederland.nl/nederland/2011/exclusief-interview-met-kate-mccann


 March 25, 2012
ANOTHER STORY
By Dr Martin Roberts

But whoever it was that members of the Smith family actually saw being carried, it could not have been Madeleine McCann in her Eeyore pyjamas. The child seen by Aoife Smith was said to have been wearing a long-sleeved top. If one is prepared to accept that Jane Tanner can discern the colour of a garment from some distance away, in the dark, when she cannot even see the item in question, then it is even more reasonable to accept the accuracy of Aoife Smith's close-up description.


August 23, 2012
'OUT, DAMN'D SPOT'
By Dr Martin Roberts

Kate's transient preoccupation with those Eeyore pyjamas may have been indicative of nothing more than a concern for 'keeping up appearances,

And then, irony of ironies, with Kate having made a special point of washing out a seemingly innocuous stain, the pyjamas are abducted, never to be seen again.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id400.html


May 24, 2013

Madeleine was wearing pink pyjamas, with an Eeyore motif, on the night she was taken from apartment 5a on the ground floor of the Waterside Gardens at the Ocean Club complex.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2330660/Madeleine-McCann-Was-Maddie-snatched-monster-killed-little-lookalike-British-detectives-uncover-dramatic-new-lead--Portuguese-refusing-investigate.html


July 8, 2013
By Dr Martin Roberts
NO WAY OUT

He could not, therefore did not, exit the apartment with a child in his arms in the two or three minutes between Gerry McCann's last 'check' on the children and Jane Tanner's 'sighting'. Nor did he leave the apartment afterwards, carrying Madeleine past the Smiths. The child they witnessed was wearing the wrong pyjamas. And since the intending abductor was not discovered inside the apartment subsequently then he was not there at all.

http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t23969-dr-martin-roberts-no-way-out-with-thanks-to-mccannfilescom


 October 15, 2013

'Revelation moment': Police revealed a major breakthrough when a British father came forward to reveal he was the man who for six years had been considered the prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case.

Evidence: The girl seen at 9.15pm wore distinctive pyjamas and the prime suspect also brought these to police to prove his innocence.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2460669/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapping-innocent-British-father-mistaken-key-suspect.html


October 15, 2013

We know the pyjamas their child was wearing… We are almost certain this [Tanner] sighting isn’t the abductor. - Detective Chief Inspector Redwood

http://www.thestar.ie/star/irish-couples-vital-clue-in-maddie-hunt-34798/


October 15, 2013

The potential prime suspect is described as white, in his 30s, of medium build and height, clean shaven with short brown hair. He was carrying a child aged three or four who had blonde hair and was wearing pyjamas similar to Madeleine’s.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/436799/MADDIE-Are-police-closer-to-breakthrough-after-overwhelming-response-to-Crimewatch


November 15 2013 Final Comment

The McCanns altered the Smith sighting carrying style so as to match that of the Tanner sighting, in a McCann made reconstruction aired only a few days after Amaral's (in which he included the Smith sighting).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na4aBr5PTYY
from 6:36: watch "Smith" man carrying a child horizontally across his arms.


Did the McCanns also alter the pyjamas style so as to discredit the Smith sighting (girl in white, long-sleeved, pyjamas) as soon as they became aware of Jane Tanner’s sighting early morning May 4, after they had already texted and phoned family and friends.

Gerry knew that he was seen by the Smith family.

Jane, unknowingly at that time, gave Gerry McCann a perfect alibi. Just one small problem, the pyjamas.

If not, then who is that girl in white long-sleeved pyjamas in BBC1 documentary, October 14, 2013?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyJwns_MTok
(at the 23:56 mark)


Not the "Tanner" pyjamas, then also not the "Eeyore’s"?

http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/8428/7bs2.jpg


http://twitpic.com/7hz4rr

Answers on a postcard please.

Compiled by Maren, The Netherlands

Our Planet Our Future?

What you see writ below, is not in fact a post per say. Rather a comment in reply to two of my readers. The one highlight apart, which is the very crux of the thing, reproduced verbatim.

Read as a stand alone, or in conjunction with the post below.

Good morning Su, good morning Maren, yes it's all of those things.

And as far as keeping anybody informed, although I might write a few words of introduction and opine occasionally, by nature of the beast, there is little more I can do for the situation, than cut and paste information here.

That in itself though is quite telling. It tells us everything we need to know about the Main Stream Media's role in society. It is not our friend, nor is it a force for good. Not when you can source ten times the information from obscure blogs, than you can from the media.

I have though, written much in the past about the criminality of the Japanese Government, particularly in regard to the welfare of kids in the immediate area.

But as much as the actions, or more precisely, the inactions, and the deliberate withholding of information from the populace; as much as these things will turn out to be major crimes against humanity, it is to far greater things that my mind turns.

On a more philosophical level, I am more annoyed than I am worried, more angry than I am annoyed.

I don't think you need to be a soothsayer to forecast, where we as a species are headed. All we face is decline; civilisations don't last forever, they self destruct, history has taught us that much, and that is without the pollution and over-population that we witness today.

But when, on a global scale, societies start collapsing, when the money runs out or becomes valueless, when faced with the next catastrophic mass extinction, and there will be one, rest assured; who is going keep safe all the nuclear fuel and junk that will have been produced from the hundreds of nuclear installations that are dotted around the globe?

Out of the billions and billions of planets throughout the cosmos, this planet is totally and utterly unique in the universe, and it is as wonderful, with all its beauty and all its diversity of life as it is unique. But we for all our intelligence as top primate, for all our advances and staggering technical achievements, fail miserably in so many areas. But no greater failure have we, than our failure in our role, as temporary custodians of this unique, precious, but most fragile earth.

What does it say of us as a species, when as we speak, the world already being past its tipping point, we continue to rape and pillage and pollute our only home? Where greed has become god? Where ignorance and superstition take precedence over learning and enlightenment? Where powerful nations slaughter innocents in their millions, and do so to a cacophony of silence? Where we inflict unspeakable cruelties on each other because the followers of one outdated superstition disagrees with followers of an equally outdated, but different superstition?

I think it might say, that we, in spite of all our intelligence, are fundamentally flawed, we have become our own worst enemy, our cerebral evolution serving only to pander to those flaws, of selfishness, of greed, and the here and now.

Such a pity though, as we head inexorably to a fate that we are undoubtedly most deserving, such a pity then, that we shall take this unparalleled world, this pale blue dot, and all its creatures, with us in the process.

Original post.

As a Species We Are Insane

Originally published under the title:

Best read in conjunction with the post above.

A Short Conversation With Paul Watson or, Mankind Is a Bollocks

The more I get to know this fellow, Paul Watson, the more he is my kind of bloke. I particularly like his take on the Jesoids, if they worried about this life a bit more and not the next, the world might be a better place.

And the auld feller, Farley Mowat, he ain't too far behind the door either.

And Teddy is back.

A short conversation between Farley Mowat and Paul Watson at Cape Breton Island Nona Scotia.

From the documentary A Pirate For The Sea.

Transcript by Teddy.

FM: I’ll tell you what I think is going to happen, I’m convinced of this. I don’t like to be convinced of it because I’m a living organism, I’m full of optimism of life, but I see the next great extinction which will then be the sixth in line since life appeared on this planet. We will be the cause and the recipient of this extinction. But in the process of course, everything else is probably going to get screwed up. How do you feel?


PW: No, I agree with that completely, that we are the last surviving species of hominid and we haven’t done too well so far, and now we are about to take down hundreds of thousands of species with us. We have created this mythology where everything revolves around us. That we are the centre of creation, that it doesn’t really matter what we do to the rest of the world. The other problem of course is, a large percentage of humanity is living this pie in the sky fantasy where they believe real life begins when they die and they go to some afterlife somewhere so that….


FM: It doesn’t matter a hell of a lot what you do here.


PW: Yeah, the planet’s expendable.


FM: Yep yep.


PW: In fact I’ve actually had some Christians come to me and say, you know you’re interfering with God’s plan. That God has ordained that these resources are here to be used while we’re here, and Jesus is going to be upset if we don’t use these resources he’s provided for us.











FM: Individuals must be relatively selfish, err in order that their species will survive, and the species must be selfish, but these things are very very relative and must be coordinated, must be taken into context with all other forms of life. If you separate them out as we have done and say, we are the only animal, the only form of life that is entitled to this self interest, we may pursue it as far as we choose, we must pursue it as far as we choose, then that is the recipe for suicide.


PW: As a species we are insane we’ve…


FM: We’re not insane a political? sense, we are out of control; in my opinion. Our whole structure is out of control, we don’t know what the hell we’re doing but we’re doing it as fast as we bloody well can.


PW: Right.


FM: Ah well, perhaps there’s hope for us in heaven.


PW: Laughs

Edward Snowden Julian Assange Do Read

Because it might seem quite familiar, in spite of it being penned nigh two hundred years ago.

It was back in 2010, when I posted, and then proceeded to wax lyrical, about Aldous Huxley's near oracle-like predictions that he proffered in a 1958 interview with Mike Wallace.

What a shame, unlike the Huxley interview, we don't have the luxury of listening to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. I'll wager he sounded quite wonderful in this, dare I call it, rant?

But more's the point, even though Proudhon was raging against the contemporary machine of pre-revolutionary France, his words wouldn't be amiss in describing the present day situation, particularly in the US. So much so in fact, that I'm still undecided as whether I stay with the Snowden-Assange header, or go for: Just another Day in Ameriki.

Anarchy is Order Without Power

Original, though with line breaks added.

To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.

To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished.

It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonoured. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality."

General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century ― Pierre-Joseph Proudhon pp. 293-294.”

Graphic Glynn Thomas where I have chosen an entirely different photo for the link.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (French 1809 – 1865) was a French politician, the founder of Mutualist philosophy, an economist and a libertarian socialist. He was the first person to declare himself an anarchist, and is among its most influential theorists. He is considered by many to be the "father of anarchism". He became a member of the French Parliament after the revolution of 1848 whereupon he referred to himself as a federalist.

Proudhon, who was born in Besançon, was a printer who taught himself Latin in order to better print books in the language. His best-known assertion is that Property is Theft!, contained in his first major work, What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right and Government (Qu'est-ce que la propriété? Recherche sur le principe du droit et du gouvernement), published in 1840. The book's publication attracted the attention of the French authorities. It also attracted the scrutiny of Karl Marx, who started a correspondence with its author. The two influenced each other: they met in Paris while Marx was exiled there. Their friendship finally ended when Marx responded to Proudhon's The System of Economic Contradictions, or The Philosophy of Poverty with the provocatively titled The Poverty of Philosophy. The dispute became one of the sources of the split between the anarchist and Marxian wings of the International Working Men's Association. Some, such as Edmund Wilson, have contended that Marx's attack on Proudhon had its origin in the latter's defense of Karl Grün, whom Marx bitterly disliked, but who had been preparing translations of Proudhon's work.

Proudhon favored workers' associations or co-operatives, as well as individual worker/peasant possession, over private ownership or the nationalization of land and workplaces. He considered social revolution to be achievable in a peaceful manner. In The Confessions of a Revolutionary Proudhon asserted that, Anarchy is Order Without Power, the phrase which much later inspired, in the view of some, the anarchist circled-A symbol, today "one of the most common graffiti on the urban landscape." He unsuccessfully tried to create a national bank, to be funded by what became an abortive attempt at an income tax on capitalists and shareholders. Similar in some respects to a credit union, it would have given interest-free loans.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Wiki more

Hidalgo County New Mexico Orwellian Doesn't Even Come Close

It's not often I'm stuck for words, but I'm stuck for words. But I shall try to string a few together.

This is not your typical, abusive, violent cop video by any means, it's far worse than anything of that ilk.

For what this short clip exposes, is the ever increasing mindset of the cops, a mindset, that they themselves are the law. Not upholders of law, other than of course, the law according to cops; the ones they just make up as they go along.

As you watch or read what this poor shmuck endured, never loose sight of that mindset, and accompanying attitude, that must be present in these cops and many more like them.. A mind set that says, yeah fuck! we can do this, we can do whatever we choose to do. And why can we do it? Because we're the cops, it's that simple.

But then, just when you think it can't get any worse, it does. It gets much much worse, not two times, but ten times worse. And why does the situation get ten times worse? With the compliance and the collusion of the facility that carried out medical procedures, that wouldn't seem out of place in some of histories most unmentionable regimes.

As I tweeted some minutes ago, this is the must watch video, to end all previous much watch videos.

4 On Your Side investigates traffic stop nightmare
05/11/2013

This 4 On Your Side investigation looks into the actions of police officers and doctors in Southern New Mexico.

A review of medical records, police reports and a federal lawsuit show deputies with the Hidalgo County Sheriff's Office, police officers with the City of Deming and medical professionals at the Gila Regional Medical Center made some questionable decisions.

The incident began January 2, 2013 after David Eckert finished shopping at the Wal-Mart in Deming. According to a federal lawsuit, Eckert didn't make a complete stop at a stop sign coming out of the parking lot and was immediately stopped by law enforcement.

Eckert's attorney, Shannon Kennedy, said in an interview with KOB that after law enforcement asked him to step out of the vehicle, he appeared to be clenching his buttocks. Law enforcement thought that was probable cause to suspect that Eckert was hiding narcotics in his anal cavity. While officers detained Eckert, they secured a search warrant from a judge that allowed for an anal cavity search.

The lawsuit claims that Deming Police tried taking Eckert to an emergency room in Deming, but a doctor there refused to perform the anal cavity search citing it was "unethical."

But physicians at the Gila Regional Medical Center in Silver City agreed to perform the procedure and a few hours later, Eckert was admitted.

What Happened

While there, Eckert was subjected to repeated and humiliating forced medical procedures. A review of Eckert's medical records, which he released to KOB, and details in the lawsuit show the following happened:

1. Eckert's abdominal area was x-rayed; no narcotics were found.

2. Doctors then performed an exam of Eckert's anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

3. Doctors performed a second exam of Eckert's anus with their fingers; no narcotics were found.

4. Doctors penetrated Eckert's anus to insert an enema. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

5. Doctors penetrated Eckert's anus to insert an enema a second time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

6. Doctors penetrated Eckert's anus to insert an enema a third time. Eckert was forced to defecate in front of doctors and police officers. Eckert watched as doctors searched his stool. No narcotics were found.

7. Doctors then x-rayed Eckert again; no narcotics were found.

8. Doctors prepared Eckert for surgery, sedated him, and then performed a colonoscopy where a scope with a camera was inserted into Eckert's anus, rectum, colon, and large intestines. No narcotics were found.

Throughout this ordeal, Eckert protested and never gave doctors at the Gila Regional Medical Center consent to perform any of these medical procedures.

"If the officers in Hidalgo County and the City of Deming are seeking warrants for anal cavity searches based on how they're standing and the warrant allows doctors at the Gila Hospital of Horrors to go in and do enemas and colonoscopies without consent, then anyone can be seized and that's why the public needs to know about this," Kennedy said.

Search Warrant Concerns more

Mad Dogs and Englishmen

Unedited

Is it the Onion I'm reading here? Is someone really trying to take the proverbial?*

Even if  you knew me, as the cynical old git that I am, you wouldn't blame me; not with a story like this you wouldn't. But then I got to thinking, thinking about things past, thinking about past experiences that we encounter, along this road we call life. That road, as it happens, being a cul-de-sac on this occasion.  

Let me tell you a little story. Are you sitting comfortably, then I'll begin?**

Whenever I go foreign, and providing I have the time, I do like to get off the beaten track and explore a wee bit. Be that, searching out goat stew in the hinterland of Teneriffe, stumbling around the woods in the wilds of Canada, or just diverting through previous unseen parts of the Netherlands.

But it is none of those places that feature in my little story today, but rather that most beautiful of Mediterranean Islands, Mallorca. Shame about the tourists.

On no day in particular, and after a perusal of the map, Cap Blanc, says I, I wonder what's at Cap Blanc?   So true to form, it's in the car I sit, and off we go.

Now as you can see from the photo immediately below, Cap Blanc is a pretty isolated spot. And given the time of year, of which I haven't a clue, but it wouldn't be high season, one does not holiday in high season if one has any sense. But given the time of year, it was quiet, deathly quiet, so quite in fact, the place almost had an ethereal feel to it,  if you will.

Now Cap Blanc might not be the Cliffs of Moher, but still pretty impressive nonetheless. And where you find cliffs, invariably you find a bloke, me on this occasion, having a gander over the edge; as one does. So there I am, soaked in the quiet and the isolation of the place, doing a bit of gandering, oh, and philosophising, you can't can't stand on top of a cliff and not philosophise, can you?

And it is in this atmosphere that I hear a door open and close. I don't have to turn around, the sound could only have come from the keeper's cottage, the place wasn't exactly a metropolis as you night have noticed.

Oh shit! Oh fuck! Oh my giddy aunt! as my mother might exclaim on occasion. There it it stood, with hate in its eyes; I'm convinced it was hate. I'm on its turf, a three hundred foot drop on one side of me, and the biggest fuck off dog I have ever seen in my life, stood between me survival, between me and my car.

Oh! and it had hate in its eyes, did I mention that? Pure fucking evil in fact, for want of a better expression.

I tell you, the son of a bitch was enormous, so big in fact, it made this bugger below, look like a puppy. Although I must say, they shared many of the facial characteristics, those normally associated with something that is going to take great delight in ripping your throat out.

Nice doggy, nice doggy.
   

Giant Fukushima Mutant Dog Wows Social Media

Picture of a giant Fukushima mutant dog has wowed social media. According to various sources, the dog was bred in Japan using in-vitro techniques. The gametic maternal cells were infused with Fukushima irradiated male DNA, then the eggs were grown in vitro. The result of the experimentation resulted in the giant dog above, which Japanese scientists are calling 巨大な犬, which translates to Kyodaina inu or Inukyodaina, ‘giant dog’ in English. No kidding. More

And I still need to be convinced the story ain't via the Onion.
 

As best I remember the situation, but I don't remember the wall.

Irrespective, wall or no, the beast would have stepped over it.

For readers not familiar.

* With it being the opening of the article,I chose to choose the proverbial, rather than the usual technical term of: Taking the piss

** Are you sitting comfortably, then I'll begin. Listen with Mother

Lighthouses of Spain: Balearic Islands

Madeleine McCann: No Stone Unturned?

Same article without highlights here.

Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The Sunday Times Insight team
27 October 2013

THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities. Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes.

The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert

Source Sunday Times (paywall)

Madeleine McCann: No Stone Unturned? (Plain Text)

Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The Sunday Times Insight team
27 October 2013

THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities. Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes.

The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 (Adrian Sheratt) The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert

Source Sunday Times (paywall)

"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" Physics Over Fiction

No hype required, for what I must assume, is the definitive 9/11 investigative documentary.

All I will say, apart from mentioning the sheer hubris and audacity of the scheme, is that the "Debunkers" come across as extremely fervent and extremely well funded. But of their arguments? I shall leave you to draw your own conclusions.

And lastly, but still staying with the debunkers, Popular Mechanics is owned by the Hearst Corporation, if you get to wondering.

eta My original title was to be:  "September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor"  Facts  Over Fiction But the term Fact leaves itself open to interpretation and to argument. But not so with our old friend Physics. Physics is fact, undeniable and unarguable.

View here, or view at source, where you will find an index of the film's contents.

The thing is lengthy, five hours in total, but in truth, the time flew by, it didn't seem five minutes, such was the quality of both research and content.

"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" is a 5 hour documentary that summarizes 12 years of public debate on 9/11. While aimed primarily at a general, uninformed audience, the film also contains some new findings that may be of interest to advanced researchers.

This film is intended as an educational, non-profit operation, and must remain so in order to fulfill all the requirements for the usage of copyrighted material. As such, the entire film is made available online for free from day one. Any purchase of the actual DVD will be considered as a form of donation to the author, in recognition of the time spent to put together this material. Free duplication and distribution of all DVDs is encouraged.

You can also purchase the 5-hour film in a 3 DVD set. Free duplication and distribution of all DVDs by Massimo Mazzucco is encouraged. Italian and French versions also available.To see the fully indexed film in one page go to  luogocomune.net

Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood: Not Well-Informed That Man

Other than  expanding the text, by way of an introduction, what follows then, is a reader's comment, posted verbatim.

But first, let me borrow a previous observation of mine, a little something to give context to Redwood's drivel.

To assess this case and come come to the only conclusion that one can; that the Doctors McCann are instrumental in the death and disappearance of their daughter, doesn't require great gifts of deduction or intellect, it requires far less; the ability to walk upright and having attained the age of six, is more than sufficient. source

As told by the BBC.

. . . . Det Ch Insp Andy Redwood, who is heading the investigation, said: "The timeline we have now established has given new significance to sightings and movements of people in and around Praia da Luz at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

"Our work to date has significantly changed the timeline and the accepted version of events that has been in the public domain to date.

"It has allowed us to work with Crimewatch to build the most detailed reconstruction as yet, and highlight very specific appeal points.

"I hope that when the public see our investigative strands drawn together within the overall context of that appeal, it will bring in new information that moves our investigation forward."

DCI Redwood said that police had sought to "try and draw everything back to zero... take everything back to the beginning and then reanalyse and reassess everything, accepting nothing".
Phone records

He added: "The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key. Primarily, we are focused on the area between 8.30pm and 10pm.

"We know that at 8.30, that was the time that Mr and Mrs McCann went down to the tapas area for their dinner, and we know that at around 10pm, that was when Mrs McCann found that Madeleine was missing." BBC

Readers comment verbatim.

He added [DCI Redwood] "The careful and critical analysis of the timeline has been absolutely key. Primarily, we are focused on the area between 8.30pm and 10pm.

"We know that at 8.30, that was the time that Mr and Mrs McCann went down to the tapas area for their dinner, and we know that at around 10pm, that was when Mrs McCann found that Madeleine was missing."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24509235

Not well-informed that man.

The first two Tapas group timelines were written by Russell O’Brien on the ripped off front and back cover of Madeleine’s sticker book, 03/04 May 2007.

Timeline 1

8:45. pm

Matt returns 9.00-9.05 - listened at all 3 - all shutters down

Jerry 9.10-9.15 in the room + all well ? did he check

9.20/5 - Ella Jane checked 5D sees stranger & child

9.30 - Russ. Ella Matt check all 3

9.35 - Matt check see twins

9.50 - Russ returns

9.55 - Kate realised Madeleine

10pm - Alarm raised


Timeline 2

8.45pm. all assembled at poolside for food

9.00pm. Matt Oldfield listens at all 3 windows 5A, B, D ALL shutters down

9:15pm Gerry McCann looks at room A ? Door open to bedroom

9:20pm Jane Tanner checks 5D - [sees stranger walking carrying a child]

9.30 Russell O'Brien in 5D. Poorly daughter

 9.55pm

10:00pm. Alarm raised after Kate

Gerald

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html

Still so into each other? Just wondering.

http://twitpic.com/74jgui

Source for the above: Kate McCann's Book To Be Truthful (and Scathing)

Do try to read. Perhaps a taster will help.

I thought I would take this opportunity to bring together on one page certain discrepancies relating to the night of May third 2007. These discrepancies, or McCann sound bites if you will, are fundamental, nay, they are the cornerstone for the McCann's claim that Madeleine was a victim of stranger abduction.

That this case has progressed to the point it has without these inconsistencies and disparities being addressed, I find not only staggering, but scandalous. That such conflicting and contradictory statements made by the parents have never been investigated by any law enforcement agency in this country, is, as I say, not only scandalous, but shameful. And please, don't give me it's jurisdiction issue.

That parents, in a case of a three year old girl seemingly disappearing off the face of the earth, can make such contradictory statements with impunity, says much for the state of this Nation, it's law enforcement, and not least it's Government.

It matters not that books are written, that documentaries are made, or whatever tripe the press wishes to print in their obsession to sanctify this loathsome pair , it matters not because it is all worthless, it is all utterly without worth until these fundamental questions are answered. more

A Tale of a Whale and Other Such Creatures

A Tale of a Whale
By Randy Malamud
28 September 2013
Truthout Op-Ed


In Blackfish, Gabriella Cowperthwaite's sleeper hit documentary about a tragedy at Orlando's SeaWorld, audiences are tempted (or at least I was) to empathize with Tilikum, the orca who killed his trainer Dawn Brancheau during a 2010 performance. The whale had been abused for decades in the service of mindless human entertainment masquerading as environmental education. ("SeaWorld artfully combines education and entertainment in a way that connects people to the sea and sea life like nowhere else," their webpage boasts.)

I felt a kind of poetic justice in the whale's eventual revolt against the handler, who must have epitomized, for him, the humiliating institutions of captive animal displays where he had had the misfortune to spend his life.

He was a "killer whale," and he killed - what part of this was unexpected?

In nature, actually, orcas are not inherently threatening to people, simply because under normal circumstances, they rarely come into contact with people. They are curious, playful, clever, highly social, keenly emotional and profusely communicative animals. Indeed, their complex social structures and bonds make it all the more debilitating for them to be removed from their natural habitats, from their communities, and cooped up - as Tilikum was - in small, dark, steel aquarium tanks, where they are deprived of their freedom and their roaming and grouping habits. In this claustrophobic imprisonment these whales become very disturbed, and consequently, violent because they cannot conduct their lives as they would choose to do. If they attack humans under these circumstances, it is because we have driven them mad.

"Killer whale," a loaded human label that reveals more about the namer than the named, constructs a human narrative that reflects a human perspective. Consider, along the same lines, "killer bees": like killer whales, the phenomenon is our fault. They didn't start killing us until we started interfering with their natural lives and transforming them from how they were to how we wanted them to be, so that they could be of greater service to us. Africanized bees were interbred with European bees in an effort to generate more honey for people to harvest: a selfish and short-sighted motive with dire ecological consequences. Killer bees were accidentally released in Brazil in the 1950s and have moved steadily north, invading much of South and Central America and the United States. While their stings are no more potent than those of other bees, they are more tightly wound, more defensive, and thus more likely to attack more quickly and in greater numbers.

By calling them "killer bees," we attribute to them a danger, a brutal malevolence, which draws on a lurking paranoia that IT they're all out to get us – IT "they" being, potentially, the entire animal kingdom - in one way or another. It's all we can do to defend ourselves with pesticides, varmint traps, population "management" or "culling," clear-cutting the nasty dangerous forests that harbor killer snakes and killer bats and poison dart frogs and other creepy-crawly spiders and scorpions and "man-eating tigers" and so forth. There's quite a rogues' gallery lurking out there in nature! Like the great American hero George Zimmerman, we are all just standing our ground (with a hair-trigger finger, poised to shoot first and ask questions later) defending ourselves against the insidious threat that all these killer animals pose to our prosperity.

The implication lurking in the denomination of orcas as killer whales suggests the violence that we fear, or imagine, or construct, in these big, "dangerous" creatures; the designation serves to drum up publicity at a place like SeaWorld, where people capture, constrain, dominate and exploit these "killers" to show how much more powerful we are than they. In the words of one Blackfish writer, SeaWorld's mission was "to turn killer whales into killer profits."

("Blackfish" is how native people refer to what the SeaWorld crowd calls "killer whales," and unsurprisingly, their relations toward these animals are much less adversarial and exploitative than SeaWorld's. The Tlingit view the blackfish as a protector of humankind, and many other tribal communities honor the blackfish as their emblematic clan animal, respecting the blackfish's need to have a wide berth rather than trying to capture, own and contain them. Native Americans enact their awe for the animals from afar, rather than demanding, as SeaWorld's audiences do, the proximity that necessitates the whales' painful dislocation from ocean to tank; from wild to captive; from authenticity to a demeaning parody of their natural existence.)

What we do to these animals by kidnapping them and transforming them into crowd-pleasing clowns suggests that, paradoxically, people simultaneously both admire and scorn their power, their natural force. We love to admire that force, finding it exhilarating to bask in its energy. At the same time, we scheme to coopt that force - to take it away from the animal and have it, commodify it for ourselves, as if we believe that the essence of life is zero-sum, and so if we want to experience the cornucopia of nature, we must harvest it, or colonize it. We must take it from them. Apparently, we can appreciate a majestic, dynamic, powerful whale only by depriving him of his whaleness, stripping him of everything that it means to be a whale. Removing him from the ocean, we cram him into a cage in Orlando because we can't see him easily in the ocean: He won't always be there whenever we come by. For our construction (our reconstruction, really our falsification) of his whaleness, he must be there for us to witness him day after day, year after year.

We (SeaWorld administrators, trainers, audiences) demand that he submit himself to our greater power, and we decide how he will manifest this phony, cheesy whaleness that is on display six times a day. Instead of his natural behavior, we would like him to swim in circles, and wave to the crowd, and prance and canoodle with the trainers. Audiences pay (a lot) to see him doing what we would like him to do rather than what he would like to do. We are in control; we're calling the shots. When we say jump, we expect Tilikum to say, "How high?"

(Note: we're not actually in control - the world is in a pretty tenuous state. Animal habitats are being destroyed on an exponentially increasing scale and extinctions, of course, are spiking as a consequence. Toxicities of every kind are rampant as never before in the history of existence. In a perversely fascinating lesson about the marvelous, far-reaching complexities of ecosystemic stability/decline, we are only beginning to see the multitudinous ways in which our global warming will afflict every species of animal, including us - the tip of the iceberg, if you will, though the iceberg is melting quickly. But the people whose job it is to monetize orcas are keenly aware that this tableau of ecological crisis isn't a very cheery spectacle: better to watch prancing whales and sustain the implicit illusion that we've got everything well in hand.)

I am not a violent person, and I do not endorse violence. But it is hard for me to avoid feeling that there is something appropriate, something fitting, something that we might have expected (if we thought more sensibly about our relationship to the other animals with whom we share this planet) when Tilikum attacked Dawn. I've had the same feeling when Montecore attacked Roy Horn (of "Siegfriend and Roy") on the Las Vegas strip, and when Tatiana, a Siberian Tiger (who had been made to reside in San Francisco instead of Siberia), attacked Carlos Eduardo Sousa Jr., a stoned zoo visitor who tried to climb into her cage. Or when Travis, a "pet chimpanzee" (not a good idea, for future reference), tore off the face of Charla Nash, who stopped by to visit him in the Stamford, Conn., home where he was kept.

At the Denver Zoo, a black rhinoceros bit off a woman's finger. The woman was participating in an innovative zoo program (that has since been "indefinitely suspended") in which visitors could feed and touch a caged rhino for $60. Other zoos have similar programs: At Zoo Miami's Rhino Encounter Station, patrons can not only touch, but also brush and smell a rhino.

Google "When Animals Attack": It happens all the time. YouTube is filled with compilation tapes: "Top 15 animal attacks"; "25 worst animal attacks"; "Crazy animals attack!" Again, let me note for the record: They're not crazy; we are. Just move away from the wild animals, please, people. Let them be.

I will transgress the anthropomorphic fallacy (the pronouncement that it is impossible to attribute human emotions to nonhuman creatures) and suggest that all these animals most likely hated the people they attacked. And I hope I will not seem too heartless when I say that I think the victims got what they deserved. They played with fire, and they got burned. What goes around comes around. Choose your cliché - there are lots of them, and they all fit. Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes, well, he eats you (The Big Lebowski). In Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man (2005), Timothy Treadwall got too close to the bears and, indeed, he got eaten. Robinson Devor's 2007 documentary Zoo tells of how Kenneth Pinyan, who enjoyed sex with horses, got anally fornicated to death. And the "Crocodile Hunter": When I heard of Steve Irwin's death, my first thought was what did you expect, messing around with poisonous giant stingrays? "Killer stingrays," we might call them.

These kinds of incidents should be teachable moments: moments when we are painfully, irrefutably shown that we do not understand other animals very well. We don't understand what they are like, or what they feel, or how we can most honestly relate to each other. We don't appreciate them. We don't respect them. We see them as fodder for our amusement.

I walked out of Blackfish thinking that the film's lesson - that captive animal display is a shameful and cruel desecration - applied not just to the ridiculous shows at SeaWorld, but to all zoos and aquariums. (Full disclosure: I walked into the film thinking that already . . . but still, Cowperthwaite's documentary struck me as a vitally incisive argument, universally, against the captivity of animals.) All three SeaWorlds - in Orlando, San Antonio and San Diego - are members of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, the entity that presents itself as the authority in maintaining the highest standards of zoo practices and "leaders in the protection of endangered species." What's wrong with SeaWorld is a microcosm of what's wrong with the institution of animal display everywhere.

Numerous effective animal rights campaigns lately have begun to chip away at the unremitting exploitation of animals that is consequent upon our intrusive voyeurism. Various zoos (including Chicago's Lincoln Park Zoo, the Bronx Zoo, the Detroit Zoo, and, in 2009, every zoo and circus in India) have phased out elephant exhibits. Elephants were perceived as especially unsuitable inmates in zoos: They suffer high rates of death and injury resulting from their captivity, including chronic foot problems caused by standing on hard surfaces and musculoskeletal disorders from inactivity that results from their being constantly penned or chained instead of able to roam freely and widely as they would like to do. The Georgia Aquarium, where many Beluga whales have died already, was recently denied permission to import more of them from Russia (some of whom would have gone into tanks in Atlanta, and others of whom would have been franchised out, dispatched to the circus that is SeaWorld.)

Cutting back on the captivity of elephants and whales is a good first step. I applaud the dawning awareness that certain animals are obviously unhappy in zoos and unfit to be locked up in cramped, inadequate cages. Three centuries after René Descartes pronounced that animals are merely automata, machines to which human beings could have no moral obligations, finally a backlash is growing.

But it's no worse, ethically, to kidnap and ruin the life of an elephant or an orca whale than it is to do so to a smaller animal - a capuchin monkey, a Chinese alligator, an East African crowned crane, a meerkat, a reindeer, a rattlesnake. Each of these animals has an array of needs and desires that cannot be met in captivity: The zoo deprives them of a free range of movement and of a certain climate, and temperature, and light, and proximity to other members of their species and interaction with other species. An environment that the animal desires and needs, comprised of certain plants and waterways and topographies, is rendered inaccessible. It may be a more obvious case to free the whales than to free the alligators, and it's fine to start with the more obvious cases, but please: Keep it going.

There are myriad arguments against zoos; the one that Blackfish amplifies most emphatically is: This is how we develop an appreciation for wild animals - by humiliating them? By "showing" them in this decontextualized, painful condition of constraint and alienation from nature, when the torments of captivity have drawn out the worst physical and psychological strains on them: Hordes of people come to gawk at this? (In the 17th century, paying audiences by the hundreds massed for visiting day at London's Bethlem Royal Hospital - commonly known as "Bedlam" - to gape at the human "Lunatickes," sometimes poking them with sticks; have we become any more enlightened since then?)

We are told (by those who profit from the prosperity of these corporations) that we demonstrate good ecological citizenship by visiting zoos, aquariums, SeaWorlds to connect with other species - to befriend them. Man, those animals must be thinking, with friends like this who needs enemies? And again, please excuse the anthropomorphic fallacy, which I like to think of as the "anthropomorphic fallacy fallacy," the pretence that we can't understand what animals are thinking. We might like to think we're unable to imagine their hopes and fears, because that would make them comfortably "other"; but this is just a convenient self-deception: We are in denial.

In fact, we can imagine very well how captive animals feel about being in cages or tanks, and it's not very appreciative. We have constructed the human-animal contact zone as a degrading spectacle. The physical retribution that Dawn Brancheau, Steve Irwin, Roy Horn and others have suffered from animals who could no longer endure the ridiculous sideshows to which we have relegated them stands as an ominous metaphor for the catastrophic ecological blowback that awaits us if we continue to treat our earthmates like slaves, freaks and fools. Truthout

How long before I get a take-down notice? Wiki

Randy Malamud is Regents' Professor of English at Georgia State University and chair of the department. He has written eight books, including Reading Zoos: Representations of Animals and Captivity (1998), Poetic Animals and Animal Souls (2003), A Cultural History of Animals in the Modern Age (2007), and An Introduction to Animals and Visual Culture (2012). He is a fellow of the Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics and a patron of the Captive Animals' Protection Society.

American Woman said - US Exceptionalism

Sometimes something comes along and you think, oh my! I've got the cream to go on those peaches.

The peach in this case, a fifteen minute video on the subject of US Exceptionalism and the American psyche.

Although the video is embedded below my chosen text, might I recommend you watch it first, in order that the true significance of the text can be truly appreciated.

Layla Anwar - Arab Woman Blues is an Iraqi blogger and she's pissed, mightily so in fact, and as you might imagine, she has every right to be.

I have featured Layla in the past, you will find her in the sidebar. But for the purposes of this post, it's not Layla Anwar per say that concerns us, but rather the comments of  "American Woman" responding to one of Layla's articles. Two of which can be found at the link below.

The link for for the original, can be found here, for what, in actual fact, is a bit of a mega-post: 

Behold: The U.S. God Of War. A Brief Statement of Hate and Hypocrisy Writ Large

Where you will find the relative article: God Bless America

American Woman said...

Awwwww you hate me Layla? That really breaks me up!!! Good God, how pathetic can you get? Let that hate consume you...go ahead, let that hate flow...do it for me.

You know, this blog entry should be the automatic response sent to every American who agrees with anything you have to say. You know, the ones who kiss your ass, begging for forgiveness of their sins. I am talking about the Americans who don't think they are included in your hate-speak - when, in fact, you have more contempt for them than anyone else. You make my skin crawl.

Hate me - I still have electricity
Hate me - I have running water
Hate me - I have a job & money
Hate me - I have law & order
Hate me - I don't spend my life stand in line
Hate me - I have Medicine & insurance
Hate me - I own a house
Hate me - I have a big family who love me & I love them
Hate me - I live in my own country
Hate me - I am a Christian
Hate me - I can walk down the street without fear
Hate me - I am laughing at you
Hate me - IT'S AN HONOR!!!

Face it, Americans are far more innocent than Iraqies. Iraqies relate perfectly to their so called fearless leader, Saddam - a cold, indifferent murderer himself. What is so lovable about you? You are purple fingered traders, liars, cry-babies, backward shits, cowards, sectarian & tribal assholes, fundimentalist nuts, pedophile worshipers, crooks & criminals, rapists, pimps, whores & torturers.

I need to take a bath just thinking about you people....while you enjoy wrapping yourself up in that new American flag you invented....you sick fuck...

17/3/08 3:06 PM

How lovely.

How Exceptional Are You? by Scooter Rockets

No link as yet for Scooter Rockets, other than his debut Youtube video.

H/T http://southweb.org/lifewise/