Re: 'Daddy, daddy' or 'Maddie, Maddie?'

by jd 19.01.12 0:48

Charlotte Pennington arrived on the 28th, with members of the Tapas 9. I've declared several times that I'm convinced the McCann's & Pennington's relationship has a history way beyond PDL.

Couldn't agree more, of course there is

by Praia 19.01.12 1:12

Well we have a Pauline Pennington in Downing St. as one of three on Mrs Brown's own team.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 1:31

Daisy wrote:There is no merit in me arguing the toss with you on this Advocatus. I simply don't believe GM is a Freemason. Everything I've studied and the folk i've questioned, tells me this. But I do believe he belongs to a different order, with similar aims (agenda's). Your guess on which, is at this time, as good as mine. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] I won't put up reams of info, (already gone far way off topic) but the following link will help explain what I mean. Have things changed so drastically since 1983? I doubt it, not amongst the 'old school' anyway.

"What is the Catholic Church's position on Freemasonry?"

The
Church, through its Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has formally
declared that Catholics who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of
grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.
This declaration,
which is the most recent teaching of the Church, has affirmed nearly 300 years
of papal pronouncements against Freemasonry on the grounds that the teachings
of the Lodge are contrary to Catholic faith and morals... Read on:

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

Hi Daisy,

The thing is, and you are correct above, Gerry is (to me, possibly, ahem) a psychopath. He shows all the traits. No emotion. Controlling. Distant. Cunning. I could go on and on.

He has already admitted he is "not particularly" religious.

Whilst Kate apparently has gone the other way, again, in a psychotic way.

Now if Gerry were extremely religious, I would agree with you, freemasonry, technically, is a sin.

But he ain't! Not in a million years. If he had one OUNCE of decency in him, he would not have abandoned his children every night, to get drunk, carouse, etc etc etc.

Absolutely NO man of any faith at all, hindu, xtian, moslem, c of e, nobody would do that.

IMO he is a chancer, a trougher, out for the main chance, out for number one. Quickest route to the top, trust me, is via (alleged) freemasonry. Jobs for the boys. That is how life works in certain circles, alas.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 1:31

Praia wrote:Well we have a Pauline Pennington in Downing St. as one of three on Mrs Brown's own team.

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

by Advocatus 19.01.12 1:36

jd wrote:Hi Daisy [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] , I've been doing a lot of research lately and did come across some very interesting analyse regarding gerry and his alleged masonry links, with many pictures of how he gives the "sign" and it does look convincing & did catch my attention. But I am not going to comment further until I have researched more as there are factors to consider but on the face of it, it is very possible though not proven but enough at the moment to be worthy of discussion at this point in time

Please do post it when you feel able!!! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Praia 19.01.12 1:38

He did not abandon them, they were being minded imo. You need to ignore all the negligence stuff, it's a smokescreen.
I agree GM would have no problem in disobeying the Catholic church.

by Liz Eagles 19.01.12 1:40

Praia wrote:He did not abandon them, they were being minded imo. You need to ignore all the negligence stuff, it's a smokescreen.
I agree GM would have no problem in disobeying the Catholic church.

I agree Praia. There is an assumption that all Catholics obey the Church. IVF isn't a great favourite of the Catholic faith either.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 1:51

Daisy wrote:
Praia wrote:`Does the pic. in the link not say Metro club? Anyhow I dont recognise it and neither does the person sitting beside me who knows the bar scene.

I did note club & bar if you look, just wondered if they could possibily have been same place. Seems not, thanks for answering my question.

I'm now believing, along with other forum members that have already stated - Charlotte Pennington arrived on the 28th, with members of the Tapas 9. I just wanted the proof, that's all (credit Stewie). I've declared several times that I'm convinced the McCann's & Pennington's relationship has a history way beyond PDL.

Everything is topsy turvy in this case (intentionally I guess). But even the main Nanny/Pre-school teacher at Madeleine's nursery in the UK is connected. Hayley Plummer is the girlfriend of Kate's cousin James Kennedy, son of her uncle, Brian Kennedy. Small world they lived in.

I hope someone is writing all this down! It is all very well speculating, but someone needs to get out a bloody great piece of paper and write down all the links! I was going to try this with my abortive thread on coincidences but have given up.

Just like people can be convicted on 15 out of 19 LCC DNA alleles, I believe that mathematically there comes a point where a proof can be made that all these 'coincidences' in this case can only point to one thing - collusion - and thus sway a jury toward a conviction. providing other evidence, firm scientific evidence, is also part of the prosecution.

"Weight of evidence ... beyond all reasonable doubt..."

My nephew is a Cambridge Maths PhD, if I could get the data in one complete list he could come up with some probability statistics. But that is a hell of a lot of work. I've alread come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.

by Liz Eagles 19.01.12 1:58

I hope someone is writing all this down! It is all very well speculating, but someone needs to get out a bloody great piece of paper and write down all the links! I was going to try this with my abortive thread on coincidences but have given up.

Just like people can be convicted on 15 out of 19 LCC DNA alleles, I believe that mathematically there comes a point where a proof can be made that all these 'coincidences' in this case can only point to one thing - collusion - and thus sway a jury toward a conviction. providing other evidence, firm scientific evidence, is also part of the prosecution.

"Weight of evidence ... beyond all reasonable doubt..."

My nephew is a Cambridge Maths PhD, if I could get the data in one complete list he could come up with some probability statistics. But that is a hell of a lot of work. I've alread come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.[/quote]

Publish it then. You're safe. It's only a theory. It might just help Madeleine.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 1:59

Praia wrote:He did not abandon them, they were being minded imo. You need to ignore all the negligence stuff, it's a smokescreen.
I agree GM would have no problem in disobeying the Catholic church.

I also think there is a huge smokescreen, and I also think the children were being perhaps communally babysat by one or two nannies every evening - certainly NOT in 5a! - so there are two parallel universes going on here...

1. The smokescreen for newspapers etc - checks every 15 minutes, the parents on the face of it are clearly negligent, nothing is done by the authorities, no charges are brought, anywhere. They (the authorities) are either useless, or they know more than we do, and are covering-up.

2. What really went on that week.

by Praia 19.01.12 2:00

Daisy I was pointing out you said retro, the sign says metro.

by Praia 19.01.12 2:02

You were going on about GM abandoning his children.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 2:29

aquila wrote:I hope someone is writing all this down! It is all very well speculating, but someone needs to get out a bloody great piece of paper and write down all the links! I was going to try this with my abortive thread on coincidences but have given up.

Just like people can be convicted on 15 out of 19 LCC DNA alleles, I believe that mathematically there comes a point where a proof can be made that all these 'coincidences' in this case can only point to one thing - collusion - and thus sway a jury toward a conviction. providing other evidence, firm scientific evidence, is also part of the prosecution.

"Weight of evidence ... beyond all reasonable doubt..."

My nephew is a Cambridge Maths PhD, if I could get the data in one complete list he could come up with some probability statistics. But that is a hell of a lot of work. I've alread come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.[/quote]

Publish it then. You're safe. It's only a theory. It might just help Madeleine.

I've already come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.

Guilty M'Lud

by Liz Eagles 19.01.12 2:44

Advocatus wrote:
aquila wrote:I hope someone is writing all this down! It is all very well speculating, but someone needs to get out a bloody great piece of paper and write down all the links! I was going to try this with my abortive thread on coincidences but have given up.

Just like people can be convicted on 15 out of 19 LCC DNA alleles, I believe that mathematically there comes a point where a proof can be made that all these 'coincidences' in this case can only point to one thing - collusion - and thus sway a jury toward a conviction. providing other evidence, firm scientific evidence, is also part of the prosecution.

"Weight of evidence ... beyond all reasonable doubt..."

My nephew is a Cambridge Maths PhD, if I could get the data in one complete list he could come up with some probability statistics. But that is a hell of a lot of work. I've alread come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.[/quote]

Publish it then. You're safe. It's only a theory. It might just help Madeleine.

I've already come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.

Guilty M'Lud

I do apologize. I may have misunderstood your post. I was thrown by the nephew with the Cambridge Maths Phd and thought that your own probability statistic being 100 percent was linked to that. It must have been my misjudgement.

by Advocatus 19.01.12 3:57

aquila wrote:
Advocatus wrote:
aquila wrote:I hope someone is writing all this down! It is all very well speculating, but someone needs to get out a bloody great piece of paper and write down all the links! I was going to try this with my abortive thread on coincidences but have given up.

Just like people can be convicted on 15 out of 19 LCC DNA alleles, I believe that mathematically there comes a point where a proof can be made that all these 'coincidences' in this case can only point to one thing - collusion - and thus sway a jury toward a conviction. providing other evidence, firm scientific evidence, is also part of the prosecution.

"Weight of evidence ... beyond all reasonable doubt..."

My nephew is a Cambridge Maths PhD, if I could get the data in one complete list he could come up with some probability statistics. But that is a hell of a lot of work. I've alread come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.[/quote]

Publish it then. You're safe. It's only a theory. It might just help Madeleine.

I've already come up with my own probability statistic, and it is 100 per cent.

Guilty M'Lud

I do apologize. I may have misunderstood your post. I was thrown by the nephew with the Cambridge Maths Phd and thought that your own probability statistic being 100 percent was linked to that. It must have been my misjudgement.

I'm sorry aquila! This is the problem on the internet, instead of talking face to face. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I do have my very great suspicions, like we all do, but I seem to find myself changing course as more evidence and links/dates emerge, if that makes sense?

I AM a betting man, I like to gamble and weigh up the odds, the pros and cons, say, of a football game, or a tennis match. These instincts can just as well be applied to a case such as this.

So I still have a very open mind, GUILTY M'LUD (someone IS!!!!) for now, we will see what evidence emerges in all the court cases in February! [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by rainbow-fairy 19.01.12 8:43

Daisy wrote:There is no merit in me arguing the toss with you on this Advocatus. I simply don't believe GM is a Freemason. Everything I've studied and the folk i've questioned, tells me this. But I do believe he belongs to a different order, with similar aims (agenda's). Your guess on which, is at this time, as good as mine. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] I won't put up reams of info, (already gone far way off topic) but the following link will help explain what I mean. Have things changed so drastically since 1983? I doubt it, not amongst the 'old school' anyway.

"What is the Catholic Church's position on Freemasonry?"

The
Church, through its Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has formally
declared that Catholics who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of
grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion.
This declaration,
which is the most recent teaching of the Church, has affirmed nearly 300 years
of papal pronouncements against Freemasonry on the grounds that the teachings
of the Lodge are contrary to Catholic faith and morals... Read on:

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

Daisy, I don't often disagree with you but I have to on this one... It just can't be argued that it is impossible for GM to be a mason on the grounds of his so-called 'religion'. He has already demonstrated that he is more than prepared to stick two fingers up at the Vatican if it gets him what he wants...
I posted on a different thread, can't remember which, the question 'What is the Catholic view on IVF?' Its not forgiving, let's say that...it is classed as a mortal sin. It is considered that it is taking 'the giving of life' away from God and into doctors hands.
Yep, you've mortally sinned IF you are a Catholic and participated in IVF, so IF Gerry or Kate are Catholic, I don't think threat of 'mortal sin' would stop them joining a 'secret society' if they thought they'd get something out of it!

by Guest 19.01.12 9:15

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

If there is a nanny involved in the original planning, who only arrived on the scene the same day with part of the T9. Someone who they knew could be trusted. Maybe someone who even has some sort of special services training. It 'might' suggest that the creche sheets from day one are not credible. Why else would you need to incorporate a nanny into the plan who works at the resort, unless part of the decption was going to take place right there? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by **tigger** 19.01.12 9:20

The performance he gave for the GNR is a 'cry for help' -
PeterMac posted the exact instruction for this some time ago: on your knees, make a 90 degree angle with your body, hit the ground with both hands and - something or other about the noise you're supposed to make.
Now Kate in her early phone calls said: Gerry is running round, roaring like a bull.
Both of them more or less repeated the thing in the bedroom in the presence of the GNR.

My theory is this.
Gerry counted on most police being in the Masons.
He performed his cry for help the moment the GNR arrived.
This clearly didn't elicit the right response.
To hide this masonic angle, he and Kate went through a similar performance in the bedroom.

Right from the word go, the Portugese police were in G's bad books. Imo he had counted on the appropriate response. When he didn't get that, TM went immediately into lying mode: the Portugese police aren't doing anything etc.

I'm sure he is a mason, probably low grade.
Because:
An awful lot of his buddies are.
They are not ardent Catholics (in fact there are Catholics in the masons), there is also a catholic type of masonic movement.
The all boys club of the Masons love these little charades although when you're in real trouble you can sometimes be given a magic formula, such as: 'Is there no help for the widow's son?'.
Would be tiresome if it weren't for the power these people have.

I think we can really forget the religious angle of the McCs, purely for effect. The Pope didn't whoosh them from his site for nothing.

by jd 19.01.12 9:22

Its very weird that their kids spend most of their lives with nannies back in the UK as well as on the holiday, all day it seems...yet they left them without one in the evenings in PDL...just does not make sense at all. And why aren't their T7 friends not being called up for neglecting their kids too

The mccanns getting to their knees praying like that is just absolutely bizarre....

by Advocatus 19.01.12 9:36

tigger wrote:The performance he gave for the GNR is a 'cry for help' -
PeterMac posted the exact instruction for this some time ago: on your knees, make a 90 degree angle with your body, hit the ground with both hands and - something or other about the noise you're supposed to make.
Now Kate in her early phone calls said: Gerry is running round, roaring like a bull.
Both of them more or less repeated the thing in the bedroom in the presence of the GNR.

My theory is this.
Gerry counted on most police being in the Masons.
He performed his cry for help the moment the GNR arrived.
This clearly didn't elicit the right response.
To hide this masonic angle, he and Kate went through a similar performance in the bedroom.

Right from the word go, the Portugese police were in G's bad books. Imo he had counted on the appropriate response. When he didn't get that, TM went immediately into lying mode: the Portugese police aren't doing anything etc.

I'm sure he is a mason, probably low grade.
Because:
An awful lot of his buddies are.
They are not ardent Catholics (in fact there are Catholics in the masons), there is also a catholic type of masonic movement.
The all boys club of the Masons love these little charades although when you're in real trouble you can sometimes be given a magic formula, such as: 'Is there no help for the widow's son?'.
Would be tiresome if it weren't for the power these people have.

I think we can really forget the religious angle of the McCs, purely for effect. The Pope didn't whoosh them from his site for nothing.

Can anyone post me to the Petermac Masonic cry for help thread

I have some Masonic books and I see now prostates bowing and wailing, as to Mecca

All he had to is say to them"is there no help for a poor widow's son?"

Or do the real Masonic sign for high distress which is like a bizarre semaphore moven
Him roaring like a bull sound like white coats time.. lol4

by uppatoffee 19.01.12 9:53

Stella wrote:Excellent sleuthing everyone. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If there is a nanny involved in the original planning, who only arrived on the scene the same day with part of the T9. Someone who they knew could be trusted. Maybe someone who even has some sort of special services training. It 'might' suggest that the creche sheets from day one are not credible. Why else would you need to incorporate a nanny into the plan who works at the resort, unless part of the decption was going to take place right there? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Looking at the Mark Warner website it suggests that the summer season runs from end of April. It would be interesting to know when the other nannies arrived in PdL. If Charlotte was the only one arriving at this time and the rest had been there for weeks then it would definitely look a bit more suspicious than it already does.

"Seasonal dates are as follows: Winter - late November to late April Summer - late April to late October (some peak season contracts available from June to September but not for all positions, please call us if you're unsure)"

The staff handbook gives more detail
"If your employment starts at the beginning of the season you will arrive during the “start-up period” which is normally about 10 days before the guests arrive. During this period there is a lot to do, in order ensure the hotel is fully functioning for the season (especially as some hotels may have been closed for approximately 6 months prior to opening). Start-up is a crucial time in resort because it sets the scene for the whole of the season. In fact the success of the season often depends on the success of start up."

This would certainly suggest that staff should already be there before any guests arrive.

by Guest 19.01.12 10:06

Catriona Baker's admission that she prepared ID bracelets for every child in advance, is paramount here also.

Nowhere in any statement do any of the T9 talk about their children's perspective nanny and who it would be. According to the nannies, they were all at the welcome meeting.

When did they tell MW or OC that they would be using the creche facilities? The day before?

Other people booked the creche facilities in advance with their room requests, but not this lot, why? Especially when all had plans to fill their days with sport.

How did Catriona know to write out a bracelet for Madeleine and Tanner's girl in advance? Why does Cat not remember seeing Madeleine and putting her bracelt on that morning?

Why are none of the children seen wearing these cruscial ID bracelets?

IMO, this is precisely where the deception stems from.

by jd 19.01.12 10:08

Though this is the Mark Warner resort in Egypt, this should give you an idea of how their resorts are run.....See any similarities??? I've highlighted a few

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

Ofsted Whistleblower reveals widespread failings in the care of the under-fives

Viewers will be shocked to see how Imogen Willcocks, a 21-year-old undercover BBC journalist with no experience of looking after children and no professional qualifications, is employed to look after young children under the age of five by two nurseries in Britain, and a leading British holiday company (Mark Warner). Furthermore, they will see her approved as a registered childminder by Ofsted.

Imogen's undercover filming takes place at Just Learning in Cambourne (near Cambridge) and Buttons nursery in west London, as well as a Mark Warner holiday resort in Dahab, Egypt – an upmarket company that markets itself as offering "award-winning childcare".

The undercover footage in the programme reveals:

•A failure to make criminal record and reference checks – The companies that featured in the programme all employed Imogen to look after young children without obtaining CRB (Criminal Records Bureau) checks, or speaking to any of her referees.

•Adult to child ratios are not met – The required adult to child ratios were not always met – At Mark Warner, an extra child arrives at the crèche but no one knows who she is

•Health & Safety compromised – The BBC reporter was given no practical training to ensure that she could deal with emergency situations whilst looking after the children. And the health and safety of the children was compromised on a number of occasions – At Mark Warner, the BBC reporter was asked to accompany and supervise young children on a sailing trip without enough safety helmets for all the children, and take young children into the water without any assessment of her swimming ability. Also, at the Mark Warner resort in Egypt, a room listening service designed to check on children every 30 minutes whilst their parents are out, was found to be inappropriate because the staff could only listen at the door – they couldn't see if the children were all right or go into the rooms. Indeed, a Mark Warner nanny told the BBC undercover journalist that before the journalist arrived in April 07, a girl under the age of five had escaped through the window of a room and was found wandering around the complex within metres of the pool.

•No training – No or negligible training was given to the undercover BBC reporter in any of her jobs. This is despite the fact that Mark Warner, for example, told her that she would receive training before starting the job.

•Illegal working on tourist visas – Mark Warner employees at the resort were found working illegally on tourist visas because, according to one member of staff, Mark Warner are "too cheap to cough up and pay for [work] visas".

From Imogen Willcocks
Mark Warner operates at the top of the holiday market, charging up to £8,000 for two weeks abroad for a family of four. It makes a point of offering "award-winning" childcare. That award-winning care didn't extend to checking my CV, contacting my references, doing a criminal records check or even asking to see some basic ID. Again, I could have been anyone.

I worked at Mark Warner's swanky Hilton resort in Dahab, Egypt, where the luxurious hotel rooms are built to resemble a traditional whitewashed Arab village. Despite being promised two days' training at the interview, I was thrown straight in with a group of toddlers. Once, there were two of us looking after 13 children - when Mark Warner's own regulations state there should be no more than six per adult.

When I asked about my training, the manager just said: "You don't get official training as such. It's very relaxed, very laid-back here." This is unlikely to be the approach parents think they are paying for.

Next, I was asked to supervise the children on the beach. Again, no one had checked if I had any swimming or rescue qualifications. Even more worrying, I had to take children out on a boat without enough safety gear for all of them. When I raised the issue with my manager, he told me to go ahead with the boat trip anyway. Also, for such a prestigious company with an upmarket reputation, Mark Warner has a very cavalier attitude to the employment laws of the countries where it operates, and is not controlled by Ofsted.

Like many of its staff in Dahab, I was there on a tourist visa. Mark Warner should have paid for work permits but instead had us break Egyptian law on their behalf. We were told we should just lie and say we were there on holiday, but Egypt is not the kind of country-where you want to end up in prison. Three weeks after I returned from Egypt, the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a Mark Warner resort in Praia da Luz in Portugal made headlines around the world. No one blamed the company or its staff for the little girl's disappearance, but given the case, I assumed the company would toughen up its vetting of nannies."

by finch 19.01.12 10:16

I found this on MCF. It regards all the creche workers for all the age groups (arrival dates) :

Cat Baker : March 21
Pennington : April 28
Lunne Fretter : March 21
Emma Wilding : Marc 22
Kirsty Maryan : March 21
Leanne Waystaff : March 23
Shinead Vine : March 21
Pauline McCann : April 29

by jd 19.01.12 10:17

finch wrote:I found this on MCF. It regards all the creche workers for all the age groups (arrival dates) :

Cat Baker : March 21
Pennington : April 28
Lunne Fretter : March 21
Emma Wilding : Marc 22
Kirsty Maryan : March 21
Leanne Waystaff : March 23
Shinead Vine : March 21
Pauline McCann : April 29

Pauline McCann : April 29??????

Log in for more topics