Discussion:
Leveson enquiry & Madeleine McCann
(too old to reply)
Jahbulon
2011-11-21 10:43:21 UTC
Permalink
Royal Arch Freemason Brother Gerry McCann gives evidence to Leveson,
Wednesday, 23.11.2011

http://alturl.com/hqmfw

Perhaps Brother Gerry McCann can explain to Leveson how after being
'mentally raped' in the News of the World, Kate McCann returned to News
International for book serialisation in The Sun.
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
Richard McKenzie
2011-11-21 11:22:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jahbulon
Royal Arch Freemason Brother Gerry McCann gives evidence to Leveson,
Wednesday, 23.11.2011
http://alturl.com/hqmfw
Perhaps Brother Gerry McCann can explain to Leveson how after being
'mentally raped' in the News of the World, Kate McCann returned to News
International for book serialisation in The Sun.
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasonshttp://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
  then they fight you, then you win"
'mentally raped' versus child neglect good at passing the buck.

I bet had they been a working class family on benefits etc there other
kids would have been taken off them from the social societies. Though
given Baby P maybe not.
Jahbulon
2011-11-22 17:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Though given Baby P maybe not.
Help A London Child: murder a social worker today :)
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
R. Mark Clayton
2011-11-23 01:57:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jahbulon
Royal Arch Freemason Brother Gerry McCann gives evidence to Leveson,
Wednesday, 23.11.2011
http://alturl.com/hqmfw
Perhaps Brother Gerry McCann can explain to Leveson how after being
'mentally raped' in the News of the World, Kate McCann returned to News
International for book serialisation in The Sun.
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?

An opportunity not to be missed!
Jahbulon
2011-11-23 10:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Jahbulon
Perhaps Brother Gerry McCann can explain to Leveson how
after being 'mentally raped' in the News of the World,
Kate McCann returned to News International for book
serialisation in The Sun.
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
Like Kate & Freemason Brother Gerry McCann are going to take a polygraph
lie detector and explain how long it took them to report the
"disappearance" to Sky News, the balloons and wrist bands, while they
eschew press intrusion?
Post by R. Mark Clayton
An opportunity not to be missed!
In your dreams!
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
sutartsorric
2011-11-23 12:27:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
Richard McKenzie
2011-11-23 15:43:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by sutartsorric
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)

Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
The Todal
2011-11-23 16:10:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by sutartsorric
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child is
kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers and take
it up the arse from the police.
sutartsorric
2011-11-23 16:30:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by sutartsorric
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child is
kidnapped or killed.  Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers and take
it up the arse from the police.
Point 1,

At no point during my daughters life have I had a conversation with
someone who mentioned her name while pushing a finger in and out of
his mouth.

Point 2,

At no time when my children were young, have I left them anywhere
alone while I went out eating and drinking with my mates. I know this
point has been covered endlessly before but it still paints a pretty
selfish picture of the parents that some people think deserve my
sympathy. I think they have learned a very grave lesson, and sadly a
young girl had to die in order for them to do so.

Point 3,

Had I done the unthinkable (for me) things that I mention above, and
come back from my gut filling session only to find one of my children
missing - the first thing I would not shout is "they've taken her",
and then rush back to the bar leaving the twins in the very same
apartment that my daughter had vanished from. Nor would my first words
to my friends in the bar be "we have let her down".

Point 4,

I would not insist that my daughter had been taken by someone who
entered through the window, even months after the police had proved
that the window and shutters could only have been opened from the
inside and that there are no marks or DNA evidence showing that anyone
could have climbed through that window, let alone carrying a child.

Those will do for starters.

Now you can prattle on all you like about taking things up the arse,
but you only believe what you have been told to by the media hype.

I am sorry but I cant really help folk like you who have given up
thinking for themselves because the reality they face is too nasty to
comprehend.
The Todal
2011-11-23 16:54:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by sutartsorric
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.
Point 1,
At no point during my daughters life have I had a conversation with
someone who mentioned her name while pushing a finger in and out of
his mouth.
Are you on medication? What on earth are you on about?
Post by sutartsorric
Point 2,
At no time when my children were young, have I left them anywhere
alone while I went out eating and drinking with my mates. I know this
point has been covered endlessly before but it still paints a pretty
selfish picture of the parents that some people think deserve my
sympathy. I think they have learned a very grave lesson, and sadly a
young girl had to die in order for them to do so.
I'm very glad that you are such a brilliant parent. I expect you have
carefully avoided taking your kids to Portugal as well. In the unlikely
event that they fall under a bus, you'll be amazed that all your careful
precautions have come to nought.
Post by sutartsorric
Point 3,
Had I done the unthinkable (for me) things that I mention above, and
come back from my gut filling session only to find one of my children
missing - the first thing I would not shout is "they've taken her",
and then rush back to the bar leaving the twins in the very same
apartment that my daughter had vanished from. Nor would my first words
to my friends in the bar be "we have let her down".
Okay. Let me see the script, and I'll tell you whether it looks realistic.
Maybe we can make it into a movie for you.
Post by sutartsorric
Point 4,
I would not insist that my daughter had been taken by someone who
entered through the window, even months after the police had proved
that the window and shutters could only have been opened from the
inside and that there are no marks or DNA evidence showing that anyone
could have climbed through that window, let alone carrying a child.
Come off it, you wouldn't expect marks or DNA evidence, not unless you've
been watching too much telly.

I suggest you would, like the McCanns, be displeased if the police said
"case closed, no further action required" when you knew that your child was
still out there, alive or dead. Or maybe not? Maybe you come from one of
those families that are so enormous that you can lose a few little children
along the way without taking the trouble to go and look for them?
Post by sutartsorric
Those will do for starters.
Now you can prattle on all you like about taking things up the arse,
but you only believe what you have been told to by the media hype.
What media hype is that, then?
Post by sutartsorric
I am sorry but I cant really help folk like you who have given up
thinking for themselves because the reality they face is too nasty to
comprehend.
The nasty reality is vicious trolls on the internet prattling on about how
they imagine Mr and Mrs McCann killed their own child and disposed of the
body.
Richard McKenzie
2011-11-23 16:55:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by sutartsorric
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child is
kidnapped or killed.  Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers and take
it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.

The McCanns originally claimed they found the shutters and window of
the children’s room open. They ’phoned relatives that night saying:
‘An
abductor broke in and took Madeleine’. But when police and the
managers
of the complex declared there was no sign of forced entry, they soon
changed their story, saying they must have left the patio doors open.
The window had been cleaned the day before. Only Kate McCann’s
fingerprints were found on the window.


The McCanns gave different accounts of whether they were both with
Madeleine at tea-time on the day Madeleine was reported missing – and
gave
three different versions of who read the children bedtime stories the
night Madeleine was reported missing: (a) Kate (b) Gerry or (c) they
both did.

Kate McCann said that their friend Dr David Payne knocked on the front
door of their apartment at about 6.30pm on 3 May, but was immediately
sent away without ever entering. Dr Payne, however, said he came in,
saw
all three children dressed ready for bed, and stayed for at least
several minutes.

The McCanns said the children were in their pyjamas by 6.30pm the
night Madeleine disappeared, were bathed at 7.00pm and asleep by
7.30pm. But just a few weeks later, in his blog, Gerry
McCann wrote: “The twins must like their new cots as they were asleep
by
7.30pm which was most unusual”.

Dr Matthew Oldfield claimed he and his wife arrived at the Tapas bar
at
8.55pm, but then went back to the Paynes’ apartment to chase them up
as
they were late. Dr Russell O’Brien confirmed that: “Matt, around 9pm,
got up and said ‘I’ll go and drag them out’.” The Paynes flatly
contradicted this.

Dr Matthew Oldfield changed his story several times. He said he did
one
‘check’ on the children, then said he’d done two. He changed his story
about the 2nd check, first saying that he walked by the McCanns’
apartment, later saying he’d entered it. Dr Kate McCann claimed Dr
Oldfield said, at 9.30pm: “I’ll check on Maddie for you”. Why didn’t
he say: “I’ll check on the children?”

The
McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner insisted she’d seen someone carrying a
child close to the McCanns’ apartment at 9.15pm the evening she was
reported missing. But she changed her description of this person
several
times. Later, one of the McCanns’ detectives said she might have seen
a
woman, not a man. She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked
past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins. But neither of them could
remember seeing her.


*********

Instead of looking for Madeleine, two friends of the McCanns tore off
the cover of Madeleine’s Activity Sticker Book, writing down what they
claimed was a record of the night’s events. They then wrote out a
second
timeline of what they said happened. In both versions, they said Jane
Tanner had seen an abductor around 9.15pm. But she did not tell the
McCanns what she had seen for 24 hours.

*******


The McCanns claimed they were dining yards from their children, said
they could see their room, and said it was ‘just like being in your
back
garden’. In truth, the children’s room was 120 yards away and the
children’s room was on the far side of the apartment block and they
couldn’t see their room.


Gerry McCann on 4 May (the day after Madeleine went missing) said:
“Yesterday, Madeleine and and the twins were put to bed in their
respective beds at 7.30pm”. Yet when the police arrived at about
11.00pm, they found a bed where Madeleine was supposed to have slept
and two cots. Moreover, in a magazine interview in January 2008, Gerry
McCann said: “On one bed the twins lay sleeping”.


The McCanns said Madeleine and younger brother Sean were crying on
their own the night before she was reported missing. Yet they left all
three children on their own again the very next night.


Gerry McCann claimed that a senior Social Services official had told
him: “Your child care was well within the bounds of responsible
parenting”. He has never said who that was.



******
The McCanns, when asked a simple question as to whether they had given
the children Calpol or other sedatives the night Madeleine was
reported
missing, denied on TV ever giving their children Calpol or other
sedatives. But Kate McCann’s father confirmed that they did give the
children Calpol.
******



The McCanns said: “Madeleine does not like to be called Maddie and
does
not answer to Maddie”. But Gerry McCann called her ‘Maddie’ on Friends
Reunited, the twins called her ‘Maddie’, and their relatives and
friends
called her ‘Maddie’. A long list of examples is at www.mcannfiles.com

.
Kate McCann said that when she went to their apartment at 10.00pm on 3
May, she was 100% sure that Madeleine had been ‘taken’. But the
McCanns
allowed their 7 friends, several staff from the Ocean Club, and
others,
to traipse all round their apartment, thus contaminating a crime scene
where vital forensic evidence could have been found. The police found
no
forensic trace of any abductor.

.
On the night Madeleine was reported missing, two sets of police
arrived, the local GNR, and then the national force, the PJ. On the
first occasion, Gerry McCann fell down on his knees, spreading out his
arms on the ground, rather like a Muslim at prayer. On the second
occasion, both Gerry and Kate McCann repeated that same strange
gesture,
on the double bed in their apartment, in front of the PJ.


****

On 4 May, the day after Madeleine went missing, the McCanns were
returning to Praia da Luz. The police seized CCTV film at a petrol
station, showing a girl similar to Madeleine with two adults. The
police
asked the McCanns to return to Portimão, but Kate McCann became
irritated at being asked to visit the police station again. The police
said she showed no hope Madeleine could be found.

In a BBC TV interview, Kate McCann admitted that she had never spent
any time at all physically looking for Madeleine.

*****


The Portuguese police were told by British police: “The McCanns have
no
credit or ATM cards”. But their flights to Portugal and hire of a
Renault Scenic in Portugal were paid with credit cards. Then Gerry
McCann admitted having credit cards, saying they went missing after
his
wallet was stolen. He gave two different places where his wallet was
stolen: Waterloo Station – or ‘near Downing Street’.


After she was taken in for questioning on 7 September, Kate McCann was
asked 48 questions by the Portuguese police. She refused to answer any
of them. She was asked if she realised that she was hindering the
investigation by refusing to answer questions. She said: “Yes, if
that’s
what the investigation thinks”. Their official spokesman, former head
of Labour’s Media Unit, Clarence Mitchell, stated: “The McCanns were
fully within their rights not to co-operate”.


Mitchell was appointed the McCanns’ spokesman by former Prime Minister
Tony Blair. Mitchell once boasted that as the £75,000-a-year Head of
Unit, his job was ‘to control what comes out in the media’. When
Mitchell’s post with the McCanns became part-time, he immediately
landed
a job with Freud Communications, owned and managed by Rupert Murdoch’s
son-in-law, Matthew Freud.



****
The McCanns said publicly in August 2007: “We will take a lie detector
test at any time”. Then a newspaper offered to pay for one. They then
changed their mind and said they wouldn’t.

*****



Some months after they returned to England, the McCanns and their
friends were asked by Portuguese police to take part in a
reconstruction
of the events of 3 May 2007. They all refused.


******

When asked by a Portuguese journalist from Sol
to give some details about Madeleine’s abduction, the McCanns’ friend
Dr David Payne said: “This is our matter only. We have a pact of
silence. All comments must go through Gerry McCann”.

*****


The McCanns’ friends gave three different versions of how often they
were supposedly checking the children – hourly, half-hourly and ‘every
15 minutes’.
.
The Portuguese police did not believe that the McCanns’ friend Jane
Tanner was telling the truth about the abductor she claimed to have
seen. Following a series of mobile ’phone conversations between Gerry
McCann and former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Brown pressurised the
Portuguese authorities to allow Gerry McCann himself to release a
description based on Tanner’s dubious claims.

****

The Home Office refused the Portuguese police permission to examine
the
McCanns’ credit card and bank statements, mobile ’phone records and
Madeleine’s medical records.

*****

Gordon Brown was told that Portuguese detective Mr Amaral, who took
the
McCanns in for questioning, would be removed from his post before he
himself was informed.


On British police advice, the Portuguese asked top dog handler Martin
Grime to bring his springer spaniels, Eddie and Keela, to Praia da
Luz.
Eddie is trained to detect the scent of human corpses; Keela is a
bloodhound. Eddie had never given a false alert in over 200 previous
outings. He alerted to the odour of a human corpse in these locations:
four different places in the McCanns’ apartment, two of Dr Kate
McCann’s
clothes, one of the children’s T-shirts, on the pink soft toy, ‘Cuddle
Cat’, and in two places in the car the McCanns hired. Eddie did not
alert to a corpse scent anywhere else in Praia da Luz. Keela detected
blood, which may have been Madeleine’s blood, at some of these
places.

When they heard about the dogs’ findings, the McCanns reacted
strangely, claiming that…

· The ‘smell
of death’ may have been found on Kate’s clothes because she was said
to
have been close to six corpses in her last two weeks at work, on the
pink soft toy ‘Cuddle Cat’ because she ‘sometimes took Cuddle Cat to
work’, or that the ‘smell of death’ could have come from rotting meat
that Gerry McCann was taking to the local rubbish dump from time to
time

· If Madeleine’s
DNA were to be found in the boot of their car, it may have come from
the children’s dirty nappies they claimed they were carrying in the
boot

· Any blood
found in the flat might have come from Madeleine ‘grazing her leg’ or
suffering a nosebleed. In fact, with the help of Martin Grime’s
bloodhound, the police found blood underneath the tiles below a window
in the living room of the McCanns’ apartment.


The McCanns also claimed that sniffer dogs were ‘notoriously
unreliable’. They quoted a U.S. case where a cadaver dog’s alert was
said to be wrong. Months later, the dog’s alert was proved right.

****

In 2008, a Portuguese TV interviewer asked: “How can you explain the
scent of cadaver found by the British dogs?” Kate McCann replied:
“Maybe
you should ask the judiciary. They have examined all evidence”. When
the interviewer pressed Kate McCann for an explanation, Gerry McCann
intervened, smirking, and replied: “Ask the dogs, Sandra”.

****


When the McCanns moved from their apartment to a villa in Praia da
Luz,
a neighbour saw their car boot left open all night long. A relative of
the McCanns, Michael Wright, admitted to police that this was because
of
a horrible smell in the car. This was the same car where Eddie, the
cadaver dog, alerted to the smell of a corpse.

****


Kate McCann clutched ‘Cuddle Cat’ in front of TV cameras, claiming it
reminded her of Madeleine, and was ‘comforting’. Yet shortly before
the
sniffer dogs arrived, she washed Cuddle Cat, claiming it ‘smelled of
sun
tan lotion’. This would make forensic analysis of it much harder.



The McCanns ignored police advice not to publicise Madeleine’s
distinctive mark in her right eye, a ‘coloboma’. They said that if she
was with an abductor, it could place her life in danger. On 15 July
2009, Gerry McCann said: “We thought it was possible that publicising
her coloboma could harm Madeleine. Her abductor might do something to
her eye. But in marketing terms it was a good ploy”.


Kate McCann, in 2007, said: “I know that what happened is not due to
the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under
other circumstances”.

On 3 June 2007, Gerry McCann said: “We
want a big event to raise awareness she is still missing…It won’t be a
one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that”. On 28 June, he
said: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for
Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.


On 11 December 2009, Gerry McCann said: “There is no evidence that we
were involved in Madeleine’s death”. The previous year, the McCanns’
spokesman said: “Can I suggest you actually quote me accurately. I
said:
‘I believe Kate and Gerry are not responsible for Madeleine’s
death’.” (this is on youtube)


On 24 August 2007, Gerry McCann, in a Scottish TV interview, said: “In
fact, one of the slight positives in all of this is that there is so
much rumour about what did and didn’t happen, it’s actually very
difficult, if you’re reading the newspapers, watching TV, to know what
is true and what’s not”.

.
Asked to comment on his reaction at learning that Madeleine had been
abducted, Dr Gerald McCann said: “It was like being told you were
overdrawn on your student loan”.


Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’ spokesman, said in September 2007:
“There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police
may
or may not have found”.

Unlike most couples who lose a dear child, they did not cling to their
other two children. Others cared for them while they flew round the
world to meet the Pope, visit the U.S. and do TV interviews.


As with all of us, the McCanns’ body language may yield valuable
clues.
During TV interviews, the following conduct has been observed:
avoiding
eye contact, nervous twitching, tense facial expressions, shaking
their
heads while making various assertions, and touching or scratching
their
faces at difficult moments. They were seen smiling and laughing on
what
would have been Madeleine’s 4th birthday, just 10 days after
she went missing. Many people say they have not seen evidence of the
grief that couples would normally express if they had lost a much-
loved
daughter.


Only 13% of the McCanns’ Find Madeleine Fund has been spent on
searching for Madeleine. The Fund is a private company, not a charity.
Much of it has been used on the McCanns’ legal expenses.

The first detectives the McCanns employed were the highly
controversial
Spanish group Metodo 3. Just before Christmas 2007, their boss,
Francisco Marco, boasted his men were ‘closing in on Madeleine’s
kidnappers’, promising ‘Madeleine will be home by Christmas’. These
were
lies.

.
Next, the McCanns turned to a private investigator called Kevin
Halligen, who has various aliases. He set up a one-man company called
Oakley International, formed after Madeleine
disappeared. Yet the McCanns’ spokesman claimed Oakley were ‘the big
boys’ in international private detection. The McCanns are said to have
paid Halligen £500,000, which he squandered on high
living and hard drinking, achieving nothing. At present (March 2011),
he
has been in Belmarsh High Security Prison for 18 months, awaiting
extradition to the U.S., where he is required to face $2 million fraud
charges.


All the main ‘private investigation’ agencies used by the McCanns had
expertise in such areas as money-laundering, fraud, state security and
intelligence – not in finding missing children.

The McCanns have produced 16 different artists’ impressions of
suspects, ‘persons of interest’ and ‘persons we wish to eliminate from
our enquiries’. Yet despite their spending millions of pounds, we, the
public, know nothing whatsoever about who is supposed to have abducted
Madeleine.


The McCanns took legal action to ban Mr Amaral’s book on the case:
‘The
Truth About A Lie’. They succeeded in September 2009. But in October
2010 the Portuguese Appeal Court lifted that ban. The McCanns are
carrying on with their libel action against Mr Amaral, using their
Fund
to do so.


The McCanns said late last year that their Fund was ‘running low’, and
that the Fund ‘might run out of money soon’. Yet at the same moment,
they were negotiating a multi-million pound book deal.
The Todal
2011-11-23 17:03:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer advised
you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it was a foreign
country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what your lawyer advised
you to do and you'd be furious that they were wasting time asking you
questions that had been answered before or were irrelevant, when they should
be looking for the child.

Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what you
think they prove. Maybe the child never disappeared at all. Maybe she's
still with her parents.
sutartsorric
2011-11-23 17:45:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't.  If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer advised
you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it was a foreign
country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what your lawyer advised
you to do and you'd be furious that they were wasting time asking you
questions that had been answered before or were irrelevant, when they should
be looking for the child.
Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what you
think they prove.  Maybe the child never disappeared at all. Maybe she's
still with her parents.
Ok

So you think the usual arrogant message board ploy of "continue to
pretend you have the moral high ground and attempt to cross examine
every scrap of detail as if you were counsel for the prosecution" is
going to work?

Just read this

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id225.html
The Todal
2011-11-24 09:08:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by sutartsorric
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after.""
(Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of
got them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own
child is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your
trousers and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer
advised you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it
was a foreign country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what
your lawyer advised you to do and you'd be furious that they were
wasting time asking you questions that had been answered before or
were irrelevant, when they should be looking for the child.
Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what
you think they prove. Maybe the child never disappeared at all.
Maybe she's still with her parents.
Ok
So you think the usual arrogant message board ploy of "continue to
pretend you have the moral high ground and attempt to cross examine
every scrap of detail as if you were counsel for the prosecution" is
going to work?
Just read this
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id225.html
Here's how it works.

Numerous defamatory stories are written about the McCanns by journalists in
Portugal or the UK, under pressure from their editors to fill column space.
The McCanns claim damages for defamation. The UK newspapers make grovelling
apologies for telling lies, and pay huge sums in damages and costs (see the
testimony of the McCanns before the Leverson committee
http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/hearing/2011-11-23pm/ )

The lies continue to circulate on the internet in blogs and on bulletin
boards and fuckwitted ignorant morons continue to proclaim that the lies are
all true, because they regard the whole thing as a form of reality TV, a
whodunnit where they can have fun guessing the answer to win a prize.

Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are down there in the public sewer
brandishing turds and claiming that they are pure gold.
Richard McKenzie
2011-11-24 10:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by sutartsorric
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of
got them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own
child is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your
trousers and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer
advised you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it
was a foreign country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what
your lawyer advised you to do and you'd be furious that they were
wasting time asking you questions that had been answered before or
were irrelevant, when they should be looking for the child.
Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what
you think they prove. Maybe the child never disappeared at all.
Maybe she's still with her parents.
Ok
So you think the usual arrogant message board ploy of "continue to
pretend you have the moral high ground and attempt to cross examine
every scrap of detail as if you were counsel for the prosecution" is
going to work?
Just read this
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id225.html
Here's how it works.
Numerous defamatory stories are written about the McCanns by journalists in
Portugal or the UK, under pressure from their editors to fill column space.
The McCanns claim damages for defamation. The UK newspapers make grovelling
apologies for telling lies, and pay huge sums in damages and costs (see the
testimony of the McCanns before the Leverson committeehttp://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/hearing/2011-11-23pm/)
The lies continue to circulate on the internet in blogs and on bulletin
boards and fuckwitted ignorant morons continue to proclaim that the lies are
all true, because they regard the whole thing as a form of reality TV, a
whodunnit where they can have fun guessing the answer to win a prize.
Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are down there in the public sewer
brandishing turds and claiming that they are pure gold.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Can you explain this


The Todal
2011-11-24 13:30:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by sutartsorric
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now
so ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the
truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of
got them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own
child is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your
trousers and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted
text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything
for their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer
advised you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it
was a foreign country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do
what your lawyer advised you to do and you'd be furious that they
were wasting time asking you questions that had been answered
before or were irrelevant, when they should be looking for the
child.
Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what
you think they prove. Maybe the child never disappeared at all.
Maybe she's still with her parents.
Ok
So you think the usual arrogant message board ploy of "continue to
pretend you have the moral high ground and attempt to cross examine
every scrap of detail as if you were counsel for the prosecution" is
going to work?
Just read this
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id225.html
Here's how it works.
Numerous defamatory stories are written about the McCanns by
journalists in
Portugal or the UK, under pressure from their editors to fill column space.
The McCanns claim damages for defamation. The UK newspapers make grovelling
apologies for telling lies, and pay huge sums in damages and costs (see the
testimony of the McCanns before the Leverson
committeehttp://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/hearing/2011-11-23pm/)
The lies continue to circulate on the internet in blogs and on bulletin
boards and fuckwitted ignorant morons continue to proclaim that the lies are
all true, because they regard the whole thing as a form of reality TV, a
whodunnit where they can have fun guessing the answer to win a prize.
Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are down there in the public sewer
brandishing turds and claiming that they are pure gold.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Can you explain this
http://youtu.be/8lrrMoUr3OA
Yes. It shows a badly parked car, but fortunately the car park is so large
and there are so few cars there, that it causes no undue inconvenience.
There also seems to be a dog running around, and someone seems to have put
something in the car to attract it. The video seems to be from the Sun
newspaper. It is a long and boring video.

In the McCann investigation the British dog handler produced a report
stating that the reaction of the dog to the car was totally worthless and
meaningless as evidence of anything. I don't know if that is the same dog
handler, showing how he does his work in exchange for wads of money from the
Sun journalists.
Jahbulon
2011-11-24 10:30:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are
down there in the public sewer brandishing
turds and claiming that they are pure gold.
The Todal: why don't you take the moral high ground by telling us if you
are a Freemason so we can decide if your McCann support is fraternal?
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
The Todal
2011-11-24 13:24:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jahbulon
Post by The Todal
Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are
down there in the public sewer brandishing
turds and claiming that they are pure gold.
The Todal: why don't you take the moral high ground by telling us if you
are a Freemason so we can decide if your McCann support is fraternal?
I am not now, nor ever have been, a Freemason.

Now what? "Only the Messiah would deny his true divinity"?
francis
2011-11-24 15:20:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by The Todal
Yes, I have the moral high ground and you are
down there in the public sewer brandishing
turds and claiming that they are pure gold.
The Todal:  why don't you take the moral high ground by telling us if you
are a Freemason so we can decide if your McCann support is fraternal?
I am not now, nor ever have been, a Freemason.
Now what?  "Only the Messiah would deny his true divinity"?
Well in my case he accused me of watching Freemasons abuse children.

Mr Moore (or whatever you are calling yourself today), you have not
replied to my request on the other thread.
Jahbulon
2011-11-23 23:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Maybe the child never disappeared at all.
Maybe she's still with her parents.
Perhaps Madeleine McCann is hiding in a libel court, given the time Kate
and Freemason Brother Gerry McCann spend filing litigation in civil courts?
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
Richard McKenzie
2011-11-24 10:16:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't.  If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer advised
you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it was a foreign
country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what your lawyer advised
you to do and you'd be furious that they were wasting time asking you
questions that had been answered before or were irrelevant, when they should
be looking for the child.
I know i have said this before but if it meant spending time in prison
as long as it led to the safe return of my child i would have even
admitted i was the gunman on the grassy knoll.
Thanks for the long list of items for discussion. I don't know what you
think they prove.  Maybe the child never disappeared at all. Maybe she's
still with her parents.- Hide quoted text -
Maybe she is buried in their back garden.
- Show quoted text -
Jahbulon
2011-11-24 10:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Maybe she is buried in their back garden.
Easier to leave her corpse in the refrigerator, then dump it in the
Atlantic, using a hired car for transport.
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
The Todal
2011-11-24 13:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jahbulon
Post by Richard McKenzie
Maybe she is buried in their back garden.
Easier to leave her corpse in the refrigerator, then dump it in the
Atlantic, using a hired car for transport.
If you were bigger than an earwig, I suppose the McCanns might be tempted to
sue you for defamation.
Robbie
2011-11-24 14:05:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Jahbulon
Post by Richard McKenzie
Maybe she is buried in their back garden.
Easier to leave her corpse in the refrigerator, then dump it in the
Atlantic, using a hired car for transport.
If you were bigger than an earwig, I suppose the McCanns might be tempted to
sue you for defamation.
I'm sure they already know about Mr Moore and his mad hat fantasies.
--
Robbie
Jahbulon
2011-11-24 15:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Post by Jahbulon
Post by Richard McKenzie
Maybe she is buried in their back garden.
Easier to leave her corpse in the refrigerator, then
dump it in the Atlantic, using a hired car for transport.
If you were bigger than an earwig, I suppose the
McCanns might be tempted to sue you for defamation.
Let me get this straight: Madeleine McCann is hiding in a libel court?
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
Agamemnon
2011-11-27 21:23:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer advised
you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it was a foreign
country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what your lawyer advised
you to do and you'd be furious that they were wasting time asking you
questions that had been answered before or were irrelevant, when they should
be looking for the child.
I know i have said this before but if it meant spending time in prison
as long as it led to the safe return of my child i would have even
admitted i was the gunman on the grassy knoll.
That presupposes guilt.

And why won't you answer the many direct questions I asked you already?
Duke Gaylord
2011-11-27 23:39:54 UTC
Permalink
Could we keep this stupid garbaage (that's Swedish for shit) out of
alt.support.schizophrenia, please?

Thanking you in advance and goodbye.
Post by Agamemnon
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by Richard McKenzie
Post by The Todal
Post by Richard McKenzie
On Nov 23, 1:57 am, "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)
Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.
Let's see whether you're such a facetious bugger when your own child
is kidnapped or killed. Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
If i had a child that went missing then i would endure anything for
their safe return.
No you wouldn't. If the police told you that you were an arguido (a
suspect) and that they were going to question you, and your lawyer advised
you to say "no comment" in answer to each question, and it was a foreign
country and you weren't sure of the law, you'd do what your lawyer advised
you to do and you'd be furious that they were wasting time asking you
questions that had been answered before or were irrelevant, when they should
be looking for the child.
I know i have said this before but if it meant spending time in prison
as long as it led to the safe return of my child i would have even
admitted i was the gunman on the grassy knoll.
That presupposes guilt.
And why won't you answer the many direct questions I asked you already?
Jahbulon
2011-11-23 21:46:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Todal
Let's see whether you're such a facetious
bugger when your own child is kidnapped or killed.
Madeleine McCann can't have been killed, because then the Find Madeleine
Fund used for litigation, would be a fraud, and the donors entitled to at
least a full refund.
Post by The Todal
Maybe you'll happily take down your trousers
and take it up the arse from the police.
Normally The Todal is a Conservative, but The Todal defends Labour and
Brother Gordon Brown supporting Freemason Gerry McCann, and The Todal
attacked Home Secretary Theresa May when she told Brother Gerry McCann what
he could do with his Masonic "abduction" story, then Brother Chris Bryant
MP (Labour, Rhondda), who is responsible for the Leveson enquiry, and Mrs
Brother Ed Balls attacked Theresa May with a story about immigration
controls.

Are you, by any chance, a Freemason, The Todal? In your estimation, The
Todal, does one's affiliation to Freemasonry come above honesty in
politics?

How many ordinary people like bus drivers and labourers have been winging
before the Leveson enquiry, set-up on the demand of Freemason Brother
Reverend Christopher John Bryant MP (Labour, Rhondda)?

Tell me, The Todal, do you support Welsh Labour's Masonic 'Jobs for the
Boyos' scheme?
--
Praise be to Jahbulon, holy god of Royal Arch Freemasons
http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/jahbulon.html

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you,
then they fight you, then you win"
R. Mark Clayton
2011-11-25 01:58:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by sutartsorric
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Will she be under oath and liable to cross examination?
It wouldn't make any difference if she was; the 'story' is now so
ingrained in her head she probably believes it to be the truth.
"Mr McCann said: "He (Myler) basically beat us into submission
verbally and we agreed to do an interview the day after."" (Skynews)

Its a shame the police were not as thorough maybe they could of got
them to answer the 42 questions.


It must have been pretty traumatic - long flight to Portugal with your ears
popping, then transfer to the resort, then you are left in your own in a
strange room in a foreign country where if anyone one does speak to you you
can't understand a word they say, while your parents are out on the raz.

Madeline must have felt terrible.

Whilst I have sympathy with some of the people who have been targeted by the
media (like the Dowlers), the McCanns have ceaselessly sought publicity not
just to "try and find Madeline", but to repeatedly deny any responsibility
fro her 'loss'. Maybe the press, with a bit of subterfuge, could have got
to the bottom of this one...
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...