McCanns: You can run but you cannot hide
It beggars belief that suspected child killers, Gerry and Kate McCann, have been granted VIP status. What is the world coming to? "Police pushed back hundreds of journalists camped outside the McCanns' vacation home, allowing the couple and their 2-year-old twins to leave for the airport. Less than an hour later, the car pulled into the airport's VIP entrance". The latest whine from the McCann media spin doctor machine is that they have become scapegoats for the Portuguese police incompetence. However, my understanding of a scapegoat is somebody getting blamed for something that somebody else has done wrong. But in this case the McCanns have done wrong. Here are some valid criticisms: In the resort where they lost their child, sympathy for the McCanns was threadbare last night. One British mother in Praia da Luz said: "We've been coming here for four years, and I'm convinced it's the safest place in Europe. If you keep your kids with you and you're a responsible parent, there's nothing to fear". Several British parents in Praia da Luz criticised the McCanns. One mother from Lancashire said: "To lose your child in a place like this... to leave them alone... why would you do that? It's not what any normal parent would do with a three-year-old".
We need to be asking questions how this could have happened, that is, that the government and British Media became guilty in condoning child neglect and/or child abandonment and turning the perpetrators into victims and then giving them celebrity status. "In an unprecedented move, the Government took over news-handling on behalf of the McCanns. Sheree Dodd, a former Daily Mirror journalist and long-serving senior spokeswoman for the Government, was dispatched to Portugal. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office announced that she was being deployed as “press officer responsible to act as media liaison officer for the McCann family”".
"After a couple of weeks, she was replaced by an even more prominent political figure. Clarence Mitchell, a former BBC News presenter now working as a senior government spin-doctor, became the voice of the McCanns. He was described formally as providing “consular support in exceptional circumstances”. His costs came to just over £6,000, and Ms Dodd’s are likely to be similar.
A Foreign Office source said: “This has been a completely new situation. We had to do something.”
Mr Mitchell was regarded by journalists as an impressive and helpful figure who was sensitive to the needs of the locals as well as the British".
It remains that the McCanns have not answered some very awkward questions. At least, they are guilty of child neglect and/or child abandonment. At worst, they are suspects in Madeleine's death and her disappearance.
9 comments:
The observer reports that the DnA is not conclusive (no surprise). Team Mccann have also been lobbying the Foreign secretary to head off the possibility of charges being made against them.
God forbid that the McCanns ever compare their situation to that of Sally Clark or Angela Cannings - also portrayed as wrongly accused but innocent in the eyes of the world, the media and eventually the judiciary.
It is also interesting to note that those who would normally support mothers/parents who have been wrongly accused previously, are not doing so now. Of equal interest is the total lack of condemnation by Social Services, the RCPCH (usually first to speak out against any parent considered to have "defaulted") or their own colleagues.
I can tell you exactly why the McCanns and the rest of the group who neglected their children will not be prosecuted, because Gordon Brown is handling matters behind the scenes.
He is known to have discussed the case with Gerry McCann from very early on.
Gerry McCann's father was a Labour Minister in 1960's.
Their are hints at masonic connections...
but the one thing that is clear, is that Gordon Brown has dispatched senior government spin doctors to handle the PR campaign, and invested a great deal of political capital...
My money is on their return to Britain is because of the embarrassment potential of thm being in Portugal and being charged during the expected election campaign in the Autumn.
If you want a real conspiracy theory, try finding reference of "Jeremy Wilkins" on the BBC website.
He is the man who completely undermines the abduction story, which is based on a sighting by one of the McCann party, Jane Tanner, of an identikit paedo - 35-40, male, white, hair longer than shoulder length, seen carrying what could have been a child over his shoulder.
According to Wilkins he not only did not see this man, he didn't see Jane Tanner.
transfattyacid: This is a good post from P20 in the Daily Mirror Forum in relation to Jeremy Wilkins:
Same Daily Mail write-up : [quote] Jane Tanner said she took her turn ten minutes later and saw a darkhaired man carrying a child in his arms * as she came back. * [end quote }
Ah hah ! Looks as if the Daily Mail is 'creating ' its own version of the 'news' several months after the fact, by grabbing information from these forums and putting novel little twists on them to fool the 14 people still left in the UK who still might have a bit of trust the media, lol.
If --- as Daily Mail claims today --- Jane Tanner saw the dark haired man * as she came back * ....................... then it can ONLY be that she also checked the McCann apartments. So what did she SEE in the McCann apartment ? Was Madeleine THERE, as Gerry claims she was only ten minutes before Jane ?
If so .................. and * IF * Jane was following hot on Gerry's heels and was only ten minutes behind him ......... then it can ONLY mean that the 'man' stole Maddie from under her own (Jane's) nose and then *overtook her * and beat her down the road .... thus generously giving Jane the opportunity to get such a good look at him and the child and its pajamas !
Wasn't that *nice* of him ?
Dear Daily Mail .......... when your editors instruct your hack journalists to RE-write history in order to whitewash the Tapas Nine .......... pul-eeeeese try NOT to drop the Tapas Nine even further in it than they already are ? Huh ?
Jane Tanner's story has changed like the wind, allegedly. First she wasn't *at* the dinner until 9.30 pm ' because she was running late ' and just happened to see a man carrying a child as she headed to the good old home-away-from-home Tapas. Remember ? Remember that, Daily Mail ?
But that didn't work. Because at 9.30, Gerry invited the aerobics instructress to join the gang at the table. And the aerobics instructress SAW who was and was *not* present. Besides ---- after Oldfield changed *his* story, it left Gerry high and dry as the last person to *claim* to see Maddie alive.
It was at that point, apparently, allegedly, that Jane Tanner suddenly changed her story. Remember that ? And the *new* version has her *in* the Tapas bar by at least 9.15 ............ because that's when ( she allegedly claims) she trailed Gerry by ten minutes in doing her checks around the apartments.
And in the *new* version, she claims she saw the man with a child as he passed her on the road *to* the apartments.
* Except * dear old Gerry was STILL there, speaking with witness Jeremy Wilkins, wasn't he ?
So, as I've said a hundred times by now .......... Jane's claim to have passed the man on the road requires that he must have stolen Maddie from right under Gerry's *nose* !!
And this information has filtered through and has been discussed for days now in the various forums. The same forums that you, Daily Mail, grab your information from and then afterwards *creatively rewrite it *, thinking all the time what clever little monkeys you are in daubing facts with liberal doses of Daily Mail Whitewash spin solution.
But ooops. You slipped up ...........*again *.
Because in the creative-writing exercise you tried to slip past the public today, you've dropped Jane Tanner right in it this time.
YES ! She'll thank you, no doubt, for stating in print that SHE was the last person to see Madeleine alive, when she conducted her checks AFTER Gerry !
Gee, Gerry will be thrilled to be let off the hook. Now let Jane stew for a while, he must be thinking. Maybe he'll thank you in his blog.
You should have left it alone, Daily Mail. I mean who do you think you are ? The entire UK media stinks in the nose of the entire world, thanks to your continual lies and arrogance in believing you, of all people, had the right and the ability to pervert the course of justice by making it up as you go along.
Now please pay attention, Daily Mail. Grab your calculators. Turn on your brains.
Gerry left Tapas at 9.05
Jane followed him and left Tapas ten minutes later, i.e., 9.15
BOTH Gerry and Jane were BACK at Tapas by at LEAST 9.30, because that's when Gerry grabbed himself a witness (intentionally or not, lol) by inviting the sharp-eyed aerobics instructress to join the merry gang at the table.
Right. Gerry left Tapas at 9.05. Got to the apartment when .... 9.09 ?
Got inside apartment, checked children, claims they were *all * present and *all* were 'fine. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What time is it now --- 9.15? Bit later if he went to the loo, titivated himself up a bit before returning to Tapas? (that's if he was *alone* in the apartment during that time, of course.)
At 9.15, Jane claims she left the Tapas to follow, for some reason, in Gerry's footsteps, even though NO-one had bothered checking the children for *how* long beforehand ? So she claims she wasn't *with* Gerry, but instead trailed him by 10 minutes.
So by the time Jane started heading up the road towards the McCann apartment .......... guess what ? That's right .... Gerry, who was in the process of exiting the apartment via the back door, after which he stopped near the shutters or was *doing* something with the shutters ~~~~~~~~~ was spotted by Jeremy Wilkins (according to media claims who quote Wilkins ).
Wonder if old Ger was happy about that ? Well, what could he do -- duck back inside the apartment ? No, course not. So he had to stop and chat with Jeremy for a while.
Now in her *second* version of what she did and where she was at the crucial time that night, Jane reportedly claimed she passed the man carrying the child as she was heading *towards* the McCann apartment.
But *that* had fatal flaws, didn't it ? Because if Jane had been telling the truth (and gee, Daily Mail, do you have any idea why she *wouldn't* tell the truth? ) about seeing the man as she headed *towards* the McCann apartment --- it would have meant the man was heading *away from * the apartment with the child and would have required the 'man' to have grabbed Madeleine while Gerry was *right there *. Now that would look suspicious, wouldn't it ?
And Gerry was STILL there, talking with Jeremy Wilkins as Jane headed towards them. Yet *neither* Wilkins nor Gerry saw this mysterious man that Jane claims had a child. Which is just as well, huh ... or Gerry and Wilkins would have been prime suspects weeks ago, suspected of handing Madeleine to Jane's ' man '.
But never fear. Daily Mail is here. And Daily Mail's *new* spin (the 3rd version) has Jane seeing the 'man' on her way *back * now.
Dumb. Dumb, Daily Mail.
Because Jane was only ten minutes behind Gerry. And Gerry had used his ten minutes and more, all up.
Oh. And it gets worse, Daily Mail.
Because it's not an open-ended scenario you have here. What's that --- you *forgot * about that ? Too bad. Too bad for you. Next time, try *reporting* the fookin news instead of *inventing* it.
Ah. You're seeing where you went wrong now, are you ? Took you long enough.
That's RIGHT ! Jane and Gerry were BOTH back at the Tapas Bar by 9.30 !
And our Jane claims she left Tapas ten minutes after the lovely Gerry. In other words, Jane had 15 minutes to get around those apartments and find ALL the children present and unharmed (which she obviously did, or she would have had to raise the alarm about Maddie being 'taken' right then, wouldn't she --- before 9.30 ).
So Gerry's been up the road, into his apartment. Checked his kids. Probably went to the loo. Went out of the apartment again. Messed around with or near some shutters for a bit. Was spotted by Wilkins. Had to stop and talk with Wilkins for a bit. Then had to get BACK to Tapas by 9.30 latest, in order to charm the aerobics instructress into joining the gang at the table.
And Jane was ONLY ten minutes behind him in all this .. she claims, allegedly. Yet she was *not* spotted by Gerry or Wilkins.
Now how strange is THAT ! Because they were there, on the spot, with a clear view of the road. And that was the ONLY road Jane could take.
Only ten minutes behind, remember ?
Gerry didn't see her.
But *she* saw --- according to you, Daily Mail --- a 'man walking down the road and he had a child ".
*** So what are you trying to TELL us, Daily Mail ?
Are you saying that Jane saw *Gerry* going down the road ahead of her with a child in his arms ?
WOW!
Maybe......the man Jane Tanner saw carrying a child was Jeremy Wilkins, the man who Gerry stopped and talked to on the way back from the 9.05 check. Jane claimed to have seen he and Gerry talking together, although Jeremy refutes that he saw anyone. Jeremy did have his own child with him though, admittedly it was a boy but Jane did say that she saw a child, not that it was either female or was Madeleine.
Jeremy says he did not see Jane and Jane says she saw a man a little way off, with a child. Perhaps they are both confirming each other's story, even if Jane appears to be suggesting she saw another man, other than Jeremy. It was dark so it is possible that she is telling the truth, rather than being creative with the truth in inventing a mystery man. If Jane's mystery man is Jeremy and Jeremy was walking away, he would not have seen Jane - so he and Jane could both be correct.
A prayer from Portugal to the McCann family. We believe in you. God will protect you.
what are the connections kate McCann with Tony Blair?
anonymous 11.21: Who has said there is a connection?
Clepsidra: I feel sorry for you in your mistaken belief in both respects.
I can tell you exactly why the McCanns and the rest of the group who neglected their children will not be prosecuted, because Gordon Brown is handling matters behind the scenes.
He is known to have discussed the case with Gerry McCann from very early on.
Gerry McCann's father was a Labour Minister in 1960's.
Their are hints at masonic connections...
You are way off beam, but I'm not surprised given your highly partisan approach. Gerry McCann's father was not a Labout MP, and has never been a minister.
Tip to the wise: don't beleive everything you read on the Mirror forum. A lot of is posted by total wind-up merchants, who really don't care if they make you look silly or not.
Post a Comment