The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Page 3 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Tony Bennett on 15.06.15 14:06

@Gaggzy wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:@ HelenMeg - the cover-up/deception/whitewash etc. was IMO in place on Day One. Cameron doesn't have the power to change this, even if he wanted to, the powers-that-be have agreed it

Who are the powers-that-be Tony? Do you mean The Queen?
Let me just put it this way @ GGS

Groups of high-level political and celebrity paedophiles (yes including some Royals) have been able to cruelly abuse children, mostly already vulnerable, for decades - and successive British Prime Ministers and Home Secretaries, Conservative and Labour, have not only done sod-all about it, but have actually covered this up and actively protected them from investigation and prosecution.

Jimmy Savile...
The Geoffrey Dickens dossier...
Leon Brittan losing files...
etc. 

I would further suggest that organisations like MI5, MI6, Special Branch and other arms of the security services are more powerful than the Prime Minister as they hold the 'dirt' on everyone.

These scum are prepared to go as low as secretly filming young boys being sadistically abused by VIPs at Kincora Boys Home - so that these VIPs could later be controlled - FACT.

Look at the quote from Ken Livingstone at the very end of the last of Richard D. Hall's four films of 'The True Story of Madeleine McCann'.     

These same security services have been all over the Madeleine McCann case like a nasty rash since Day One

I believe this, 100%.
@ Gaggzy

I forgot to add this screenshot from the last couple of minutes of Richard D Hall's 'True Story of Madeleine McCann':  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIjPcvmVzUo


____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 15.06.15 14:15

@TB.

I've 'read' your posts above.

Is it your 'contention' then, that, by 'association' ALL of the T9, and possibly JW, are/have, 'also' being/been 'protected' by the 'dark forces' for 8 years?

IF so, then for how 'long' will 'they' continue to be afforded the same 'protection' as the McS?

Perhaps THAT'S 'where' the £6,778 a 'day' to OG, is being 'spent'?

"protection" for 'all'?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by HelenMeg on 15.06.15 14:50

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
@willowthewisp wrote:HelenMeg,

Her Boss DC and his boss, Her Majesty!?
We have another difference of opinion here @ HelenMeg...

OK then - so that implies then, following on from others' posts above - that David Cameron holds the key to whether the truth is allowed to emerge or not.

And those above him and those who are colluding with him

Back in 2007 the Blair/Brown governments politically interfered with the investigations.

Yes - and why?

DC's government was 'persuaded / cajoled / bullied' into reviewing the case.

By Rupert Murdoch and his CEO Rebekah Brooks - and against the wishes of Theresa May who was overruled

DC suddenly found out it was a can of worms.

No way, sorry. He appointed former Murdoch man Andy Coulson as his Director of Communications in 2009. The two of them appointed Clarence Mitchell in 2010 as their Deputy Director of Communications, and Cameron sanctioned him being admitted as a Conservative Party candidate at the recent General Election. Remember Rebekah Brooks' text? - "We are all in this together"? There is a cabal at the top keeping the lid on what really happemd to Madeleine McCann. We don't yet know why

What does he do now?

Hope against hope that CMOMM doesn't uncover the real truth 

My belief is that he will allow some of the truth to emerge but be will be too cowardly or 'influenced' to allow the whole truth... that is my view.

No way - see above 

Some, it seems, think he will or has ordered a whitewash - which implies he is in full agreement with the Labour government of 2007 that the truth must not emerge. I dont think that is feasible although it is true that certain establishment figures cross above the political agendas.  

@ HelenMeg - the cover-up/deception/whitewash etc. was IMO in place on Day One. Cameron doesn't have the power to change this, even if he wanted to, the powers-that-be have agreed it
  

DC also knows that the eyes of the world are watching carefully what happens in this case. He knows that a vast amount continues to be spent on this case. He knows the reputation of SY is at stake and that he himself will be exposed when the truth finally emerges, which it will, in years to come.

I suggest we are near to Operation Grange supplying the final answer - 'an abductor did it but we can't be sure who' - and then everybody apart from us poor dissidents here and elsewhere will forget about the case
Hi Tony

We agree that in 2007 the investigation into M McCann was politically interfered with by the government of the time.   You dont state why you think that was but I think that it was because of who was present
at PdL that week. IMO, there was a person / persons who did not want to be exposed as being there in PdL that week. They had high connections and pulled in favours. However, I dont think that the cov er up started on Day 1. I certainly believe there was a  period of time when Kate / Gerry thought they were doomed and it was only at a certain point of time (cant remember exactly when without looking back through files) when they realised that they would be protected by virtue of the protection being given to other people who were present at PdL that week. You can see the relief kick in - you can also see that their friends (TAPAS7) start to realise that they are saved and can refuse to go back to Portugal. The TAPAS 9 start showing arrogance that noone can 'touch' them.

When you refer to the 'Powers that be'  I want to know who you think they are?  For me, the powers that be are a mix of the extremely wealthy donors to the political parties, the influential media moguls such as RM, various Whitehall figures that advise key figures in the political parties, old Etonians who close rank etc. There is no mysterious 'power' - there are just various influences. Nothing magical about them. People who will protect their friends knowing their friends will protect them. I dont think the establishment is as strong as it used to be.
If DC is actually discussing this case with others then what is he saying?

" Look, you have to bring this case to a close as soon as possible, with as little fallout as possible.'
" I dont want his name exposing'
'Tell Nicola to close it within 6 months - quietly as possible'

I want to know what actual conversations he is having and with whom./

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 15.06.15 15:16

If DC is actually discussing this case with others then what is he saying?

" Look, you have to bring this case to a close as soon as possible, with as little fallout as possible.'
" I dont want his name exposing'
'Tell Nicola to close it within 6 months - quietly as possible'

I want to know what actual conversations he is having and with whom.
----------------------------------------------------------

THEN, the PJ 'shelve', not close, THEIR 'side of the 'case' and RELEASE ALL THEIR LOVELY 'FILES' on their  second 'investigation' detailing the co-operation, or not, of MET/OG!

Can't wait!

That's WHY, imo, MET/OG are 'struggling' to find a 'closure'.

They DON'T want, can't 'risk'?, the TWO 'different' (BHH) 'courses/lines of investigations (PJ's and MET/OG) being 'aired' in public!

WE 'KNOW' MET/OG's ONLY 'line of inquiry'.......................'THE 'ABDUCTION', BY A STRANGE BURGLATOR'

NO 'DEVIATIONS'! NO 'VARIATIONS'! NO 'OTHER' 'EXPLANATIONS'!

Plus, given that 'only' MET/OG (DCI Redwood) insisted that three Portuguese citizens were 'arguidoed' on OG's 'say so' there will be a MEGA 'compo' bill landing on BHH's desk!

How much is the going 'rate' for a lifetime's reputational damage, being defamed, by being 'associated' (by OG) with possibly being 'involved' in a 3 years old child's 'disappearance'?

All on 'record', on TV and 'press'

Quite a lot, i'd suggest!

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Joss on 15.06.15 15:44

I think the question that really needs answering is "Why are the McCann's so important that the establishment has bent over backwards for them"? This has never been seen in a missing child case before to my knowledge.
Just exactly who are the McCann's to warrant all this special attention & Why? when to the public they were only a couple of Doctors that were negligent toward their three little children in a foreign country, and because of it their eldest child came to grief.

____________________

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Doug D on 15.06.15 15:46

No disclosures on the Met’s Freedom of Information log for four weeks now. The weekly list usually gets posted up within 7/10 days.
 
http://www.met.police.uk/foi/disclosure/disclosure_log.htm
 
When it gets this far behind, you can’t help but wonder what the hold-up is and whether someone is being called on to make a decision to, errr, ‘accidently lose’ a line or two.
 
Just my cynical mind I expect.

Doug D

Posts : 2146
Reputation : 635
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.06.15 9:03

@HelenMeg wrote:
Hi Tony

We agree that in 2007 the investigation into M McCann was politically interfered with by the government of the time.  You don't state why you think that was but I think that it was because of who was present at PdL that week. IMO, there was a person / persons who did not want to be exposed as being there in PdL that week. They had high connections and pulled in favours.

REPLY: Good morning. The extraordinary and rapid involvement of the government and the security services following the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann is an acknowledged fact. You may be right that it is because of a prominent individual who was in PdL at the time. But that is mere speculation; no-one has ever produced any evidence of this. Therefore we all continue to seek to understand why this powerful intervention by the British government and its security services took place
 

However, I don't think that the cover-up started on Day 1.

REPLY: The editor of the Sun rang Jon Clarke, editor of The Olive Press, in the early morning of 4 May and told him to get to Praia da Luz immediately. He made the 5-hour journey from Ronda, Spain, before midday. The mainstream British TV stations were covering Madeleine's disappearance on the morning news bulletins. Personnel from Bell Pottinger, Leicestershire Police, the Centre for Crisis Counselling (Alan Pike) and Control Risks Group etc, were on their way that very day. According to an FOIAct reply, Clarence Mitchell was formally appointed to head up public relations for the government on Sunday 6 May. These and many other indications suggest that a planned cover-up was indeed in place on Day One  

I certainly believe there was a  period of time when Kate/Gerry thought they were doomed and it was only at a certain point of time (can't remember exactly when without looking back through files) when they realised that they would be protected by virtue of the protection being given to other people who were present at PdL that week. You can see the relief kick in - you can also see that their friends (TAPAS7) start to realise that they are saved and can refuse to go back to Portugal. The TAPAS 9 start showing arrogance that no-one can 'touch' them.

REPLY: You don't give dates, so it's hard to know exactly what you mean. In the very early days, Dr David Payne spoke of 'the pact of silence' and, according to some, Dr Gerry McCann was exhibiting signs of 'Duper's Delight'. A combination of leaks about the cadaver dogs' alerts, Madeleine's DNA allegedly being found in Apartment G5A and the hired car and then of course the McCanns being made suspects gave the McCanns a torrid time in August and September. Thanks very much to the prodigious and sustained efforts of Clarence Mitchell and others, they rapidly recovered  from that setback

When you refer to the 'Powers that be', I want to know who you think they are? 

REPLY: I answered this in part earlier - look at the last two posts on page 5, where I discussed the immense power of MI5 and the other security services:



REPLY: But in this particular case - as in so much else - a key 'power-that-be' is clearly Rupert Murdoch, his empire, and in particular his red-haired sidekick, Rebekah Brooks. Indeed, those who control the mass media are amongst the most powerful people in the world today - the result of the mass media and mass communications.

Just look at Murdoch's influence in this case:

1. Sending a reporter to PdL before dawn on 4 May
2. Intense coverage of the case throughout
3. Offering Clarence Mitchell a PR job with his son-in-law's Freud Communications firm when he ceased to work full-time for the McCanns (Sep 2008)
4. A proliferation of some of the most absurd claimed 'sightings' and stories about Madeleine in his papers; I would probably put the guff about Wayne Hewlett burning a letter from his dead father giving details of the gypsy gang who stole Madeleine at the top of the list
5. His News of the World newspaper co-operating with Leicestershire Police and the McCann Team to produce the ridiculous 'Monster Man' story (Jan 2008)
6. The Sun serialising Dr Kate McCann's book and, of course
7. Rebekah Brooks forcing David Cameron to set up the Operation Grange review after Theresa May had conspicuously failed to do so.

But over and beyond that, Murdoch has dictated who becomes Prime Miniser in this country.

In 1996 Tony Blair, desperate for power, crawled to Murdoch and did a deal with him. Result: Murdoch's papers switched from supporting the Tories to supporting Labour, and when Blair won the 1997 election, the Sun famously bragged: "It was the Sun wot won it'.

The same thing happened in reverse in 2009, when Cameron crawled to Murdoch on his Mediterranean yacht - flown there by his son-in-law, Matthew Freud.  Murdoch wanted full control of BSkyB, Cameron said 'Yes', and weeks later Murdoch's papers switched back to the Tories. And then who did Cameron then appoint to run his Communications Office? - Murdoch man Andy Coulson, former NOTW editor, and Clarence Mitchell.

Years earlier, on the eve of the Tory conference where David Cameron was to be crowned leader, Rebekah Brooks famously texted him and said: 'We are all in this together'.  


For me, the powers that be are a mix of the extremely wealthy donors to the political parties, the influential media moguls such as RM, various Whitehall figures that advise key figures in the political parties, old Etonians who close rank etc. There is no mysterious 'power' - there are just various influences. Nothing magical about them. People who will protect their friends knowing their friends will protect them. I don't think the establishment is as strong as it used to be.

REPLY: You've missed out the power of international banking companies, like J P Morgan, who have paid Tony Blair millions over the years as a reward for him going to war with Iraq - and triggering absolute mayhem in the Middle East. Blair outed as a war criminal at Leveson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trxs-ypR804


If DC is actually discussing this case with others then what is he saying?

"Look, you have to bring this case to a close as soon as possible, with as little fallout as possible".
"I don't want his name exposing"
'Tell Nicola to close it within 6 months - quietly as possible"

I want to know what actual conversations he is having and with whom.

REPLY: There will be an unaccountable, informal committee, meeting now and then to decide how to wind up the case. Likely members are: (1) David Cameron or his most trusted adviser (2) The Head of MI5 or his deputy (3) The Head of Special Branch or his deputy (4) Bernard Hogan-Howe or one of his trusted sidekicks and (5) Clarence Mitchell

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by HelenMeg on 16.06.15 9:47

Thanks Tony. I'd dearly love to be a fly on the wall in one of the unaccountable committee meetings! Wouldn't we all?!

They've probably been having them for 3 or 4 years now. If they were finding it easy to wind it down quietly it would have all been over a couple of years ago surely.
The fact that it is still 'up in the air' says that shutting down this case without revealing the truth is proving harder than they perhaps envisaged -      thumbsup

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Guest on 16.06.15 10:25

Not one but 2002: 

TB & GA
Plus 2000 odd present donors to the Fund

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by sar on 16.06.15 10:28

@HelenMeg wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
@willowthewisp wrote:HelenMeg,

Her Boss DC and his boss, Her Majesty!?
We have another difference of opinion here @ HelenMeg...

OK then - so that implies then, following on from others' posts above - that David Cameron holds the key to whether the truth is allowed to emerge or not.

And those above him and those who are colluding with him

Back in 2007 the Blair/Brown governments politically interfered with the investigations.

Yes - and why?

DC's government was 'persuaded / cajoled / bullied' into reviewing the case.

By Rupert Murdoch and his CEO Rebekah Brooks - and against the wishes of Theresa May who was overruled

DC suddenly found out it was a can of worms.

No way, sorry. He appointed former Murdoch man Andy Coulson as his Director of Communications in 2009. The two of them appointed Clarence Mitchell in 2010 as their Deputy Director of Communications, and Cameron sanctioned him being admitted as a Conservative Party candidate at the recent General Election. Remember Rebekah Brooks' text? - "We are all in this together"? There is a cabal at the top keeping the lid on what really happemd to Madeleine McCann. We don't yet know why

What does he do now?

Hope against hope that CMOMM doesn't uncover the real truth 

My belief is that he will allow some of the truth to emerge but be will be too cowardly or 'influenced' to allow the whole truth... that is my view.

No way - see above 

Some, it seems, think he will or has ordered a whitewash - which implies he is in full agreement with the Labour government of 2007 that the truth must not emerge. I dont think that is feasible although it is true that certain establishment figures cross above the political agendas.  

@ HelenMeg - the cover-up/deception/whitewash etc. was IMO in place on Day One. Cameron doesn't have the power to change this, even if he wanted to, the powers-that-be have agreed it
  

DC also knows that the eyes of the world are watching carefully what happens in this case. He knows that a vast amount continues to be spent on this case. He knows the reputation of SY is at stake and that he himself will be exposed when the truth finally emerges, which it will, in years to come.

I suggest we are near to Operation Grange supplying the final answer - 'an abductor did it but we can't be sure who' - and then everybody apart from us poor dissidents here and elsewhere will forget about the case
Hi Tony

We agree that in 2007 the investigation into M McCann was politically interfered with by the government of the time.   You dont state why you think that was but I think that it was because of who was present
at PdL that week. IMO, there was a person / persons who did not want to be exposed as being there in PdL that week. They had high connections and pulled in favours. However, I dont think that the cov er up started on Day 1. I certainly believe there was a  period of time when Kate / Gerry thought they were doomed and it was only at a certain point of time (cant remember exactly when without looking back through files) when they realised that they would be protected by virtue of the protection being given to other people who were present at PdL that week. You can see the relief kick in - you can also see that their friends (TAPAS7) start to realise that they are saved and can refuse to go back to Portugal. The TAPAS 9 start showing arrogance that noone can 'touch' them.

When you refer to the 'Powers that be'  I want to know who you think they are?  For me, the powers that be are a mix of the extremely wealthy donors to the political parties, the influential media moguls such as RM, various Whitehall figures that advise key figures in the political parties, old Etonians who close rank etc. There is no mysterious 'power' - there are just various influences. Nothing magical about them. People who will protect their friends knowing their friends will protect them. I dont think the establishment is as strong as it used to be.
If DC is actually discussing this case with others then what is he saying?

" Look, you have to bring this case to a close as soon as possible, with as little fallout as possible.'
" I dont want his name exposing'
'Tell Nicola to close it within 6 months - quietly as possible'

I want to know what actual conversations he is having and with whom./
+1 HM

sar

Posts : 460
Reputation : 139
Join date : 2013-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Guest on 16.06.15 11:13

Then, of course, we have the little matter of Sillcott putting its ugly head above the parapet

Heady days ahead

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.06.15 11:15

@HelenMeg wrote:The fact that it is still 'up in the air' says that shutting down this case without revealing the truth is proving harder than they perhaps envisaged -      thumbsup
I am in full agreement with that statement   agreed

I predicted last year on the forum that Operation Grange would be wound down before the General Election.

That's yet another thing I was wrong about  eek

I am guessing that there are serious differences within 'the committee' about exactly how - and more important when - to 'do it'. 

In the middle of a great big crisis or news story would do it - you know, 'now is a good day to bury bad news'

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.06.15 11:19

@Portia wrote:Then, of course, we have the little matter of Sillcott putting its ugly head above the parapet

Heady days ahead
Er, Winston Silcott was the black bloke who lived on the once-notorious Blackwater Farm Estae in Tottenham who either did - or didn't - butcher P C Keith Blakelock to death.

I think you may mean Chilcott - the bloke who has spent most of a decade covering up carefully researching exactly why we went to an illegal, costly and highly damaging war against Iraq.

I have great confidence in Chilcott. I have no doubt whatsoever that he will have fully investigated how millions of pounds was laundered funnelled through to Tony Blair via J P Morgan, as a reward for starting an illegal war contrary to the U N Charter.

At least he got paid a lot more than Judas Iscariot's paltry 30 pieces of silver for betraying the Son of God. No wonder he topped himself hours later:

REMINDER:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trxs-ypR804

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by sallypelt on 16.06.15 11:39

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Portia wrote:Then, of course, we have the little matter of Sillcott putting its ugly head above the parapet

Heady days ahead
Er, Winston Silcott was the black bloke who lived on the once-notorious Blackwater Farm Estae in Tottenham who either did - or didn't - butcher P C Keith Blakelock to death.

I think you may mean Chilcott - the bloke who has spent most of a decade covering up carefully researching exactly why we went to an illegal, costly and highly damaging war against Iraq.

I have great confidence in Chilcott. I have no doubt whatsoever that he will have fully investigated how millions of pounds was laundered funnelled through to Tony Blair via J P Morgan, as a reward for starting an illegal war contrary to the U N Charter.

At least he got paid a lot more than Judas Iscariot's paltry 30 pieces of silver for betraying the Son of God. No wonder he topped himself hours later:

REMINDER:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Trxs-ypR804
Operation Ore? FBI? Chicott doesn't have to look any further. It's ALL there!

sallypelt

Posts : 3302
Reputation : 522
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 16.06.15 11:41

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:The fact that it is still 'up in the air' says that shutting down this case without revealing the truth is proving harder than they perhaps envisaged -      thumbsup
I am in full agreement with that statement   agreed

I predicted last year on the forum that Operation Grange would be wound down before the General Election.

That's yet another thing I was wrong about  eek

I am guessing that there are serious differences within 'the committee' about exactly how - and more important when - to 'do it'. 

In the middle of a great big crisis or news story would do it - you know, 'now is a good day to bury bad news'

'serious differences'?

Well that's what BHH is on 'record' as saying!

TWO 'different lines of investigation' (by PJ and MET/OP)

The UK Police can NOT 'stop' the PJ 'releasing' their investigation 'files'

Indeed, the PJ HAVE TO, under Portuguese LAW, to 'release files' in ANY 'shelved' investigation.

Michelle Obama is 'in town' today and tomorrow.

Good enough er, 'distraction'?

re: my post earlier, do you, Mr Bennett, 'think' the entire T9 + JW 'are' being 'protected' by erm, the 'dark forces' of the UK 'establishment'?


jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Operation Grange

Post by willowthewisp on 16.06.15 12:14

Hi to all posters with regard to operation Grange and the Establishment involvement.
I would remind people of a Lord Stevens who investigated the Death of Princess Diana and  the Establishment alleged involvement in her demise?
Lord Stevens had an involvement into the investigation killing of Stephen Lawrence and the with holding of information of the scrutiny of the family members of the Lawrence family by undercover Police Officers, these are some of the dark forces Tony may be on about!?
A Police Officer chosen to protect the lead witness (DB) was seen by under cover officers meeting up with a MR Big whose relations turned out to be one of the suspects passing a parcel to the protection officer in a public house, the photographs taken by the under cover officers were quickly Whooooshed away never to be seen,but confirmed by press reporting of the incident!?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1352
Reputation : 514
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by HelenMeg on 16.06.15 13:47

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:The fact that it is still 'up in the air' says that shutting down this case without revealing the truth is proving harder than they perhaps envisaged -      thumbsup
I am in full agreement with that statement   agreed

I predicted last year on the forum that Operation Grange would be wound down before the General Election.

That's yet another thing I was wrong about  eek

I am guessing that there are serious differences within 'the committee' about exactly how - and more important when - to 'do it'. 

In the middle of a great big crisis or news story would do it - you know, 'now is a good day to bury bad news'
Yes - I was thinking exactly the same thing on my afternoon dog walk - re major differences between the committee members. Although I was also thinking about more fundamental differences - e.g. how much truth to reveal. Does everyone on the committee believe in a total whitewash?  Do some believe in confining it to the TAPAS 9 ? I find it hard to believe that the differences extend only as far as how and when.  Certainly when AR retired a different approach was agreed e.g. A SILENT APPROACH from OG as opposed to the former 'leaky' approach. The silent approach kicked off after the re-interviewing of RM.

There is a world of difference between David Cameron, Clarence and Bernard in terms of their personal backgrounds / upbringings. Whilst Tony has only summised these people maybe on the 'committee' I would agree these would be likely to be included. What is the common denominator that says they will all agree on the need to whitewash? This is the sort of thing that intrigues me..

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Two 'common denominators'

Post by Tony Bennett on 16.06.15 13:58

@HelenMeg wrote:
What is the common denominator that says they will all agree on the need to whitewash? This is the sort of thing that intrigues me..
ANS: (IMO of course) Because if the whole truth connected to this case were ever to emerge, it would result in (a) the nation being horrified and (b) prosecutions of some very very important people.

All the 'committee' would be only too well aware of this

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13959
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by HelenMeg on 16.06.15 14:23

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
What is the common denominator that says they will all agree on the need to whitewash? This is the sort of thing that intrigues me..
ANS: (IMO of course) Because if the whole truth connected to this case were ever to emerge, it would result in (a) the nation being horrified and (b) prosecutions of some very very important people.

All the 'committee' would be only too well aware of this
Quickly as I dont have much time - this issue about the nation being horrified is just odd - although I accept it may well be a relevant issue here.  The nation is allowed to be horrified when Lee Rigby (soldier) is slaughtered in a London street - or when Savillle / Harris are declared to have committed monstrous crimes and on numerous other occaisions tat I cant quite think of right now..

What is wrong with very important people being prosecuted?  Are very important people above the law?

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Rogue-a-Tory on 16.06.15 14:24

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
What is the common denominator that says they will all agree on the need to whitewash? This is the sort of thing that intrigues me..
ANS: (IMO of course) Because if the whole truth connected to this case were ever to emerge, it would result in (a) the nation being horrified and (b) prosecutions of some very very important people.

All the 'committee' would be only too well aware of this
agree  & of course bomb that's ticking

Rogue-a-Tory

Posts : 402
Reputation : 245
Join date : 2014-09-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Joss on 16.06.15 15:25

@HelenMeg wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
What is the common denominator that says they will all agree on the need to whitewash? This is the sort of thing that intrigues me..
ANS: (IMO of course) Because if the whole truth connected to this case were ever to emerge, it would result in (a) the nation being horrified and (b) prosecutions of some very very important people.

All the 'committee' would be only too well aware of this
Quickly as I dont have much time - this issue about the nation being horrified is just odd - although I accept it may well be a relevant issue here.  The nation is allowed to be horrified when Lee Rigby (soldier) is slaughtered in a London street - or when Savillle / Harris are declared to have committed monstrous crimes and on numerous other occaisions tat I cant quite think of right now..

What is wrong with very important people being prosecuted?  Are very important people above the law?
I believe they are, considering they make the laws, and then there are their double standards of course. Corruption in high places is nothing new, but there are levels of corruption that are now being exposed and think it is just the tip of the iceberg. Its a long way down the rabbit hole. Also with the internet now there is a lot of stuff being exposed and people are becoming more aware. Once an "awakening" starts it is only a matter of time. IMO humans are slowly evolving, and that is as needs be. All that has been hidden must come to light, and those that have committed crimes against humanity need to be made accountable for them, we should demand nothing less. Only we the people can make a difference, it is all up to us.
ETA, I also think a lot of the public in this case that aren't aware of a lot of the info. as people that follow the case on forums would be shocked to find out the truth of it. All the good people out there that have been duped into giving their money to help in aiding the search for Madeleine, i think would be very angry to find they have been lied to and a good one put over on them. I can just imagine the outrage seeing as it involves a missing child. All IMO.

____________________

Joss

Posts : 1898
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 18.06.15 13:35

ALERT!

SY's OG's 'elite' team, (the world's foremost child 'abduction' experts?) are preparing to fly out to Cyprus after reports of a 'gang' attempting to 'snatch' children, from a hotel.?

ITV News, 13hr32. 18th June 2015.

'update' later.

'gang' pretending to be 'waiters' (romanians)

No 'arrests'

It has to be stressed, that this 'activty', in Cyprus, is PURELY CO-INCIDENTAL with KM completing her Missing People 'bike adventure' yesterday.

It is not 'staged' or a 'stunt'

Phew, that's lucky, ain't it?

(Kate and Gerry are being 'kept informed'  winkwink )

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by Naz_Nomad on 18.06.15 13:43

@Joss wrote: Its a long way down the rabbit hole...
You could say it's at "the top of the warren"...only in French. whistling

____________________
Everything written by me is just my opinion.

Naz_Nomad

Posts : 138
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 18.06.15 13:50

Can't 'wait' for 'brown nose' KB and M 'sniffer' Brunt to 'report' a 2pm.

Fed up of paella, guys?

Might 'find' our MP 'Claudia' in Cyprus!

Keep 'em peeled!

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Met Police (Operation Grange) - Bollocks or not bollocks?

Post by jeanmonroe on 18.06.15 14:14

'apparent' 'abduction'..FO.

Stand down , OG 'elites', no Cyprus 'jolly' for you.

Hotel, says, 'something or nothing'

Scottish, 'people' witnessed 'goings on'

Hmmmmm.

Most of the McCann 'family' are Scottish, aren't they?

I'm 'sure' the witnesses, to the 'snatch' er, were vividly 'reminded' of Madeleine McCann 'case'

And will have a 'story' to sell tell!

Daily Record 'has' the 'story', apparently.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5129
Reputation : 884
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum