Re: Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.

by Nuala 03.07.15 10:26

Textusa has now posted a blog on this subject:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Without going in to the technicalities of this Wayback issue, she makes some excellent and very valid points as usual.

One of the most compelling is that had a top government agency been involved in the preplanned "disappearance" of MM there never would have been such an amateurish "abduction" scenario. If something happened to MM that was preplanned and involved CEOP, we never would have heard of Madeleine Beth McCann, her disappearance would have been quietly and efficiently "taken care of".

Also, everything about the "abduction" was clearly rushed: hastily scribbled timelines, shutters that weren't "jemmied", an apartment showing no sign of an intruder at all. All the hallmarks of a decision taken in haste and panic.

They are my words, not Textusa's, people can read her blog for themselves, just my quick take on some of what she's said smilie

by jeanmonroe 03.07.15 10:50

O/T.

@Nuala

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

by Nuala 03.07.15 11:38

@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though smilie

by jeanmonroe 03.07.15 12:08

Nuala wrote:@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though

Hmmm.

6 comments to The Car Hired 5 Weeks After Madeleine’s Disappearance

Nuala
September 3rd, 2014 at 7:15 pm
"I would love to know who is protecting the McCann’s from on high and why? Even the British Prime Minister helped them not have to obey usual police investigation rules . Sinister. Would be great if a Wiki type leak occurred. The parents seem guilty as hell and I began as their supporter!"

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter', that left that 'comment' then?

by Nuala 03.07.15 12:20

@ Jeanmonroe

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter',

No, that's not me.

who left that 'comment' then?

No idea, and neither do I care.

by HKP 03.07.15 12:32

@Helenmeg.
I'm pretty sure that ceop was crawled on 30/04/07, it was also done on this date (30/04) in 2006 & 2008.

The data shows that mccann. html and madeleine 01 & 02 jpg were not repeated as the WBM went into overdrive, you will struggle to find any other URLs which weren't repeated I.e

Accessibility repeated 30 times
Reporting abuse repeated 29 times
Downloads repeated 41 times.

I has admin put up a screenshot of repeats a few pages back, this was using the general search so the actual numbers will be higher.

Interestingly there is one other jpg captured at that exact time and it doesn't repeat either its cheop awards.

by rustyjames 03.07.15 14:05

HKP wrote:@Rustyjames
Over on the other forum Seahorse has found another site with the same timestamp try:-

w w w. codexgeo. co. uk

Acknowledgment to Seahorse.

Hmmm 16033 hits on that site in that 11:58:03 second - very odd.

by Guest 03.07.15 14:56

jeanmonroe wrote:
Nuala wrote:@ Jeanmonroe

Have YOU, Nuala, ever 'supported' the McCann's, at any 'time' since May 3rd 2007?

Nope.

Did you 'donate' to Madeleine's Fund, LNSU.?

Nope.

I have donated to GA's fund though

Hmmm.

6 comments to The Car Hired 5 Weeks After Madeleine’s Disappearance

Nuala
September 3rd, 2014 at 7:15 pm
"I would love to know who is protecting the McCann’s from on high and why? Even the British Prime Minister helped them not have to obey usual police investigation rules . Sinister. Would be great if a Wiki type leak occurred. The parents seem guilty as hell and I began as their supporter!"

So that's NOT you, the 'Nuala', who 'began as their (McCanns') supporter', that left that 'comment' then?

jeanmonroe: where did you find the above? I've searched here but can't find it, elsewhere perhaps.

by HKP 03.07.15 16:11

@Rustyjames.
There seems to be some evidence that at that precise second (and no other)something happened but then was OK a second later, is this possible? You'd think somebody at WBM would've noticed this anomaly as it captures say a years worth in a second (doesn't mean to say that there is no true data in the capture). Alternatively if it's misdirected URLs again such a spike in volume (we don't know how many sites involved but we now have 2) should've been noticed.

by whodunit 03.07.15 17:21

Nuala wrote:Quoting Dr Roberts:

A 'capture' just the wrong side of 10.00 p.m. on the night of 3 May would be enough to convince me.

Indeed so. That's been obvious all along. When people are desperate for their version of events to be the version of events, regardless of the evidence to the contrary, they lose credibility.

Anyone admitting they would believe a 'capture' just the wrong side of 10pm 3rd May 2007 in order to back up their own theories isn't interested in the truth, just validation.

I think you have a very strange perspective on who has been discredited here and just who it is that is desperate to push their version of events regardless of evidence to the contrary.

by whodunit 03.07.15 18:01

CEOP homepage capture code May 14, 2007

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by whodunit 03.07.15 18:08

CEOP homepage capture April 27, 2007

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

mccann.html capture dated May 13, 2007

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by miss piggy 03.07.15 20:15

Post deleted

by rustyjames 03.07.15 20:33

HKP wrote:@Rustyjames.
There seems to be some evidence that at that precise second (and no other)something happened but then was OK a second later, is this possible? You'd think somebody at WBM would've noticed this anomaly as it captures say a years worth in a second (doesn't mean to say that there is no true data in the capture). Alternatively if it's misdirected URLs again such a spike in volume (we don't know how many sites involved but we now have 2) should've been noticed.

I don't believe that number of URLs were captured in a single second from a single site. To capture 3786 in 1 second then the average response time would be under 300 microseconds. To achieve that many you would have to have multiple servers with multiple threads all co-ordinated to go to ceop and the codexgeo site, (which has an even more extreme hit rate), at the same time. I'm certain WBM spreads the load, but I'm equally certain it doesn't work in such a co-ordinated fashion. I also highly doubt the ceop site, and even less so the codexgeo site, was sized to serve that many hits a second. There is then also the matter of the "captures" on that date containing references to news articles in the future.

I'm fairly sure it must be an indexing issue but I'm at a loss to explain what could have caused it, whether it is a fault, or maybe even a feature to place a "stake in the ground" at a point in time.

The CDX records provide a lot more detail, but they still don't show everything in the records. A key part of the index contain a link to the source .(w)arc file that contains the original data, and the offset in that file to locate the data, but the WBM API doesn't supply that information in the public API response. The content of those files I would believe a lot more trust in and I assume they must be written to sequentially.

by XXXXXXXX 03.07.15 20:58

The solution lies with the person who generated this subject i.e. Stevo.

Questions should be addressed to him and not WBM.

I believe Tony alluded to this a long time ago on the original thread.

by Syn 03.07.15 21:51

A challenge for all those who believe the CEOP captures for 20070430 are correct and that all this was part of some grand pre-meditated CEOP conspiracy...

Utilising all available tools via WBM, WBM Source Directory, good old Google and of course any other tools available to you, can you tell me what, if anything is wrong with the captures on this website please?:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I will respond tomorrow after those who decide to take on this challenge have responded :)

by Candy from MMM 03.07.15 22:01

Post deleted

by whodunit 03.07.15 22:16

@syn---"A challenge for all those who believe the CEOP captures for 20070430 are correct and that all this was part of some grand pre-meditated CEOP conspiracy..."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

My argument now and has been that it appears as though CEOP was recruited into the abduction cover story, a cover story concocted to hide an unplanned 'disaster', the nature of which is suggested by the findings of the cadaver and blood dogs. the smell of bleach as reported by the GNR officer and the lack of Madeleine's dna in the apartment are both strong indicators that the apartment was so thoroughly cleaned it was actually OVER cleaned. This could not have happened on the DAY of much less the night of the abduction alarm. This 'early event' argument is not a new argument and it did not originate with me.

The prematurely launched mccann.html page at CEOP does not suggest 'grand..premeditation' but rather it strongly supports evidence which is already in the public domain, discussed here and elsewhere in great detail, that not only did something happen to Madeleine earlier in the holiday but indeed it appears that something out of the ordinary happened on or right before April 30. In other words this evidence did not appear in a vacuum, orphaned of context, no matter how many times you wave your hands and declare it so.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Now address the next/previous capture codes I provided up above.

by whodunit 03.07.15 22:31

Hey guests, instead of complaining about unnecessary off topic remarks, and thereby contributing to clogging up the thread with unnecessary off topic remarks, why don't you address the topic at hand? For instance, I've stated above what I think are the implications of a prematurely launched 'find Madeleine' page. What are your thoughts on that subject?

by Guest 03.07.15 22:46

Any mods around tonight?

by Syn 03.07.15 22:47

No straw man argument here and I have no agenda despite what you think :) I don't doubt for a second that Madeleine died in 5a Sad

Whether that was prior to 03/04/2007, I and the dogs have no idea. What I do know is that for Eddie to detect the scent of a dead body it have had to have lain in-situ for at least 1 hour 25 mins. More explained here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

'Andy Redwood is being very clever in my opinion. The crux of Redwoods appeal yesterday is in his wording. As has been pointed out by a few people already, he did not say that possibly Madeleine may no longer alive, he made the point of saying that she possibly may not have been alive before she left the apartment

He will know that it takes a minimum of 1.5 hours before cadaver scent develops on a body. That totally throws Gerry's check at 9.10 out of the window as was pointed out yesterday by others, there just ISN'T enough time between 9.10 and the 10pm alert by Kate for a body to be detectable by a cadaver dog scent wise! Eddie did not alert to Madeleine's bed so she did not die in there/was not placed in there after death so Gerry could not have stood and gazed at her thinking how beautiful she was at 9.10.

The purpose of the appeal for Binman/Tractorman is purely to eliminate him from their enquiries. Mr Redwood knows how highly unlikely it is that Binman/tractorman entered the apartment, sat on Madeleine's bed, killed her and then waited around for an hour and a half for cadaver odour to develop before making his escape with her body!

He also knows that Binman/Tractorman died in 2009.

Therefore, what Redwood is actually telling us is that he knows that the possibility of Madeleine not being alive before she left the apartment MUST mean that she died BEFORE the McCanns went out for the evening.'

Despite my total dislike of Jim Gamble and his actions in the McCann case, I do not subscribe to any premeditated CEOP involvement and I have no faith in the CEOP captures for 20070430 for reasons that I have explained over both the threads here . We also must remember that it was GA who requested CEOP assistance on 7th May (per PJ Files) and they travelled to PDL on 8th May . They then put out a press release which was picked up by MSN on 10th May. The Madeleine image used in the CEOP PDF posters used by MSM and which was also on the erroneous CEOP mccann.html page shows the image date being as at 10/05/2007 does it not?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I would address your posted images if I could see them, they are so tiny and you fail to mention why you have posted them or explained what point you are making. Tell you what, you post larger images and address my challenge and I'll address your images. Fair deal? :)

by Nuala 03.07.15 22:52

@ Whodunit

not only did something happen to Madeleine earlier in the holiday but indeed it appears that something out of the ordinary happened on or right before April 30

If something happened to MM on or right before 30 Apr and CEOP knew about it, then why was there even an "abduction" ?

With top level government help everything would have been "taken care of" quietly and efficiently without any of us knowing a thing.

The idea that something happened to MM on or right before 30 Apr and CEOP said "don't worry, all you have to do is wait three days and then fake an abduction, meantime we'll put up a web page advertising M's disappearance for all to see" is frankly ridiculous.

And not only did they wait three days to fake an abduction, and what were they doing in that three days, playing tennis? Because they certainly weren't planning a credible abduction. They had three days to get it right, not only that with CEOP on board giving them top level advice, and on the night of 3rd May there was no sign of an intruder, the shutters weren't jemmied, there was a hastily written timeline written on the cover of M's sticker book and they couldn't even make the bed look like a child had been abducted from it.

Three days to plan an abduction scene the GNR saw straight away there was no sign of when they arrived?

And they'd planned that cobbled together abduction scene over three days with CEOP's help?

by Syn 03.07.15 23:06

@Nuala

Nail on proverbial head there :)

PS I am not sure what is happening with the formatting in my previous post but it just won't play ball for some reason, 3 times I have tried to correct it now but I ain't gonna get all conspiracytheoryist over it laughat

by Nuala 03.07.15 23:17

@ Syn

Thank you smilie

I have to give credit to Textusa's blog though for raising these obvious (now she's pointed them out) arguments against CEOP being involved in something preplanned:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Syn 03.07.15 23:26

Nuala wrote:@ Syn

Thank you

I have to give credit to Textusa's blog though for raising these obvious (now she's pointed them out) arguments against CEOP being involved in something preplanned:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Very welcome :) I shall have to have a gander :) I must confess though that so much sense from Textusa does surprise me as I most often do not subscribe to her/their theories, in particular re it being a swinging holiday but that's for another topic and another day :)

Steve Marsden's WBM screenshot: The CEOP Home page for April 30, 2007 also refers to Missing Madeleine.