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

by Guest 07.08.15 21:32

Don't worry.. people are having daily conversations with him.

Unfortunately after having been promised updates we are still waiting.

I nearly didn't write this as it would only push it back to the top of the forum.. what the hell.

Most people figured it out after a while.

by Guest 07.08.15 22:52

BlueBag wrote:Don't worry.. people are having daily conversations with him.

Unfortunately after having been promised updates we are still waiting.

I nearly didn't write this as it would only push it back to the top of the forum.. what the hell.

Most people figured it out after a while.

You're right, most people figured out we were not going to get answers, a verdict of not proven would be the most likely outcome (only under Scots law).

by **Jill Havern** 24.08.15 14:36

A question left on CMOMM facebook group by Marian Greaves:

Can anybody tell me why the last photo, the one at the pool, that was in Kate's camera, but Gerry had to fly back to England to get it, was only released on 24th may, 3 weeks after she went missing, yet the CEOP pages picked up by Wayback archive had that photo loaded onto their page on 13th May?

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

by Guest 24.08.15 14:43

Get'emGonçalo wrote:A question left on CMOMM facebook group by Marian Greaves:

Can anybody tell me why the last photo, the one at the pool, that was in Kate's camera, but Gerry had to fly back to England to get it, was only released on 24th may, 3 weeks after she went missing, yet the CEOP pages picked up by Wayback archive had that photo loaded onto their page on 13th May?

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

The 13th May page doesn't have the last photo.

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

by Marian Greaves 24.08.15 17:25

thanks blue bag, yes i apologise it was the tennis one not the pool one, however it was still one of the last photo's that were said to have not been released until 24th May. I am not suggesting that there is something wrong with way back etc, all i am asking is, why did CEOP who had nothing to do with the case have it so early, yet the PJ who needed it were denied it until 24th May.

by **sharonl** 24.08.15 18:59

Marian Greaves wrote:thanks blue bag, yes i apologise it was the tennis one not the pool one, however it was still one of the last photo's that were said to have not been released until 24th May. I am not suggesting that there is something wrong with way back etc, all i am asking is, why did CEOP who had nothing to do with the case have it so early, yet the PJ who needed it were denied it until 24th May.

We have

The disappearing CATS file

Gerry McCann in possession of CEOP manuals

Gerry McCann being taken to the police bravery awards with the head of CEOP, Jim Gamble.

Jim Gamble dismissing the evidence of top UK sniffer dogs and protecting the suspects

Jim Gamble joining Kate McCann and Clarence Mitchell at Missing People charity

Jim Gambles very un-professional behaviour on Twitter, with tweets in support of the McCanns despite the evidence against them.

Jim Gamble putting the needs of the suspects before that of the missing child

Question: When exactly, did Jim Gamble and CEOP get involved in this case? I guess that we will never really know but I bet it was earlier than we think.

by joyce1938 24.08.15 23:35

I think ceop were alerted very quickly, just memory so can't say exactly, days I think, even might be 1 day. joyce1938

by Guest 25.08.15 9:05

Marian Greaves wrote:thanks blue bag, yes i apologise it was the tennis one not the pool one, however it was still one of the last photo's that were said to have not been released until 24th May. I am not suggesting that there is something wrong with way back etc, all i am asking is, why did CEOP who had nothing to do with the case have it so early, yet the PJ who needed it were denied it until 24th May.

I don't think so.

BBC May 10th 2007

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

by Marian Greaves 26.08.15 21:18

thanks for that link blue bag, i didn't realise that pic was in the press so early, i can't find a date it was given to the pj in the files, do you know if they just gave it to the british msm and ceop and not the pj?

by Guest 26.08.15 21:32

No idea Martin.

by Guest 26.08.15 21:35

Marian Greaves wrote:thanks for that link blue bag, i didn't realise that pic was in the press so early, i can't find a date it was given to the pj in the files, do you know if they just gave it to the british msm and ceop and not the pj?

"On May 9th 2007 back in the UK, Philomena McCann sends this photo as part of the 'e-poster' campaign"

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

by **Tony Bennett** 29.08.15 12:42

BlueBag wrote:Don't worry.. people are having daily conversations with him.

Unfortunately after having been promised updates we are still waiting.

I nearly didn't write this as it would only push it back to the top of the forum.. what the hell.

Most people figured it out after a while.

I did some research on the Sandy Hook shootings the other day.

Some of those who suggest that Sandy Hook was not all that it seemed to be were referring to three or four fund-raising websites that appeared to have been created two or three days before the actual shootings.

On the face of it, this looked like very good evidence of a conspiracy.

But then I found this comment, by 'saluk', which seems to be very relevant to our discussions on Wayback and that CEOP page:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

saluk | February 1, 2013 at 10:27 pm | Reply

QUOTE

As someone who works in the web, the dates really are not reliable. As others have pointed out, most pages are not created from scratch but use existing content and modify it. Many blog systems have bugs and it actually can be a chore to make sure that they have the correct date with the content written. And the google cache date is the date google visited that IP address – not the date google read the content that you see in the description. Sometimes this will line up, and sometimes it wont, but it’s not reliable.

If you want to dig into this conspiracy, you will have to do better than web page dates. You may think it’s unbelievable that so many of the fundraising pages dates are wrong.

From me I would be more surprised if none of them were wrong. Honestly, if there were a conspiracy and these pages were set up beforehand – don’t you think the cover-up operation would have been clever enough to make sure dates for cover-up pages were correct? That would be the FIRST thing you would want to make sure is right. That the date comes after the event.

If only ONE of these pages had a weird date, that would be much more curious than most of them.

Look elsewhere

UNQUOTE

by Joss 01.09.15 15:02

Tony Bennett wrote:
BlueBag wrote:Don't worry.. people are having daily conversations with him.

Unfortunately after having been promised updates we are still waiting.

I nearly didn't write this as it would only push it back to the top of the forum.. what the hell.

Most people figured it out after a while.
I did some research on the Sandy Hook shootings the other day.

Some of those who suggest that Sandy Hook was not all that it seemed to be were referring to three or four fund-raising websites that appeared to have been created two or three days before the actual shootings.

On the face of it, this looked like very good evidence of a conspiracy.

But then I found this comment, by 'saluk', which seems to be very relevant to our discussions on Wayback and that CEOP page:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

saluk | February 1, 2013 at 10:27 pm | Reply

QUOTE

As someone who works in the web, the dates really are not reliable. As others have pointed out, most pages are not created from scratch but use existing content and modify it. Many blog systems have bugs and it actually can be a chore to make sure that they have the correct date with the content written. And the google cache date is the date google visited that IP address – not the date google read the content that you see in the description. Sometimes this will line up, and sometimes it wont, but it’s not reliable.

If you want to dig into this conspiracy, you will have to do better than web page dates. You may think it’s unbelievable that so many of the fundraising pages dates are wrong.

From me I would be more surprised if none of them were wrong. Honestly, if there were a conspiracy and these pages were set up beforehand – don’t you think the cover-up operation would have been clever enough to make sure dates for cover-up pages were correct? That would be the FIRST thing you would want to make sure is right. That the date comes after the event.

If only ONE of these pages had a weird date, that would be much more curious than most of them.

Look elsewhere

UNQUOTE

From what i have read about the Sandy Hook event there was more to it than just what is mentioned here about dates. I think the biggest hoax i have seen evidence for is the Boston bombing, and there is some very good info. about it on a few sites around the internet. But i guess people believe what they want to believe.

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