Re: Latest interview with Dr Amaral - copied from Joana Morais - with thanks

by TheTruthWillOut Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:56 pm

I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.

by fossey Mon Jun 09, 2014 10:59 pm

stillsloppingout wrote:I am going to have to edit my post . its not a Gay footballer my bad typing and sentencing . and its 3 superinjunctions not D notices they are national security , this is just a footballer who has three times done stuff . but do not post any names . because this has derailed the thread . and i could be in trouble .

To the mods im sorry .

My fault SSO with my inquisitive nature and being a keen footballer fan.

Say no more and back on topic.

Can hazard a guess if it's classed as national security. Interesting.

by MissDaisy Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:03 pm

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.

I think you are confused with super injunctions. Footballers do not have the authority to issue DA Notices, they are between Government departments and the media. They have a website here where they give details of DA notices that have been issued. http://www.dnotice.org.uk/records.htm

by Ochosi Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

So why turn it into a criminal investigation - outside of their jurisdiction?
As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

by TheTruthWillOut Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:10 pm

MissDaisy wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.
I think you are confused with super injunctions. Footballers do not have the authority to issue DA Notices, they are between Government departments and the media. They have a website here where they give details of DA notices that have been issued. http://www.dnotice.org.uk/records.htm

I edited my post MissDaisy. But my point stands. Both are abused IMO.

by Google.Gaspar.Statements Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:12 pm

Monday, 9 June 2014
The Blacksmith Bureau

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

by fossey Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:15 pm

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
The Blacksmith Bureau

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

They won't like you posting Blacksmith blogs on here GGS.

by Mirage Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:21 pm

fossey wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
The Blacksmith Bureau

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.
They won't like you posting Blacksmith blogs on here GGS.

by j.rob Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:26 pm

Ochosi wrote:Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

It's not a sodding PR exercise. it's a murder investigation. The main culprits are fairly obvious to many people.

An explanation as to 'where is all is' - I suppose that would be something to do with the fact that people who are involved in a crime want to avoid being accused of that crime?

Yes?

by roy rovers Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:27 pm

Gordon Brown's intervention in the early days was badly misjudged. Then he was such a control freak that he called the PJ off to avoid being made to look like a pillock. By the time reality dawned and the British establishment / police understood the truth the British press and public had fallen in love with poor Maddie and the Crown Prosecution Service advised that the threshold of proof was going to be very high. That's what Andy Redwood is trying to get to - some decent proof but it's looking like he'll retire looking like a pillock too. All IMHO.

by Guest Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:28 pm

Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one? winkwink

by elasticandy Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:33 pm

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
The Blacksmith Bureau

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

i agree with blacksmith

by Mirage Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:36 pm

Dee Coy wrote:Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one?

Thanks Dee Coy. I've heard that said. Thing is, they should sort themselves out if that's the case. Either they are promulgating a common view or, if they're not, they should put their individual names to their articles. What are they men or mice?. "Confusion is good" is Gerry's specialty. I thought they were a serious outfit once upon a fairy tale. I hate fakes, I really do.

There seems a lunar aspect to their outbursts. I will go consult my almanac. dance

by Mirage Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:39 pm

elasticandy wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
The Blacksmith Bureau

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.
i agree with blacksmith

Are you able to say why?

by Ochosi Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:43 pm

j.rob – I don’t understand what you’re getting at. I’m referring to cover ups/high level involvement and the possible reasons for this. This was discussed earlier in the thread and the topic concerns Amaral’s latest interview, where he mentions the current digs etc being staged/a farce/ a movie. You’ve emboldened the bit of my post mentioning conspiracy, but haven’t elaborated.

Yes, the perpetrators seem pretty clear to me, too.

by CynicAl Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:50 pm

MaybeMaybenot wrote:
CynicAl wrote:
tigger wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:Gonçalo Amaral: Yes, we will. When MI5 opens the case files, we will find out.
Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. On location.

Well Control Risks Group were on the ground soon after the disappearance and they consist of ex security service personel. So it wouldn't surprise me if the security service were doing their own thing without telling the PJ.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id376.html

A private security firm has been secretly investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann for four months because her parents
feared that Portuguese police were failing properly to search for their daughter.

Iirc Dr. Amaral said it was the British (i think MI5) who pushed them to arrest Murat initially.
Clearly they wanted the case to be wound up quickly.
Might explain the sudden recollection of three of the T 9 that they'd seen him and explain a good deal more.

Is that in the files?

The files actually contain the information that the PJ's investigation was being badged and directed by a representative of MI5, who were naming their own 'prime suspects' and demanding their arbitrary arrest? Did the files mention what evidence was presented for MI5's insistence? Did the director of the PJ consider that his agency's mandate was to do whatever British Military Intelligence told him to do, and to throw an investigation in order to oblige?

Didn't someone also say that it was the British Police who first regarded the parent's as prime suspects?

So how many agencies were actually on the ground in Portugal directing the PJ?

I'm surprised at Amaral... He seems like a man who would tell British Military Intelligence to take a running jump and wait for due process.

Show me one video of anyone who stayed there in resort talking about a missing girl..Everyone must have been gagged....WHY?
This is a definite cover up...Absolutely sure of it

Interesting theory.

Why do you expect there to be lots of videos of anyone who was in the town at the same time talking about Maddie? How many videos exist of people who were in town at the same time as Ben Needham? Or in York at the same time as Claudia Lawrence? If this was today I'd expect every numb-brain wanting his fifteen minutes to have a video. Seven years ago? I hardly think everyone in town must have been gagged. Do you not think that journalists would have picked up on a gag? Why did Amaral not report a gag? Or was he in on it?

by utahagen Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:50 pm

elasticandy wrote, "i agree with blacksmith"

In that case, elasticandy, PLEASE explain what Blacksmith was talking about in the particular column. He has ben optimistic the McCanns will be charged. Has he now changed his mind? Or does he still believe the McCanns will be charged and is dismissing those who do not believe that?

PLEASE tell me what you think Blacksmith means here!

by Guest Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:54 pm

Mirage wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one?

Thanks Dee Coy. I've heard that said. Thing is, they should sort themselves out if that's the case. Either they are promulgating a common view or, if they're not, they should put their individual names to their articles. What are they men or mice?. "Confusion is good" is Gerry's specialty. I thought they were a serious outfit once upon a fairy tale. I hate fakes, I really do.

There seems a lunar aspect to their outbursts. I will go consult my almanac.

Certainly lost a lot of credibility with today's offering. Reminds me a bit of when religions become so powerful they start believing the words of the self-aggrandizing men within them and forget what Jesus et al actually believed and preached. Or when the upwardly-mobile start to believe their own snobbish hype and deny the two-up two-down they were brought up in and don't invite their parents to their weddings.

by Okeydokey Mon Jun 09, 2014 11:55 pm

Ochosi wrote:Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

So why turn it into a criminal investigation - outside of their jurisdiction?
As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

I think you have to understand just how effective G McC is in this world of media and politics. It's not exactly a new phenomenon - some people are just very good at mass manipulation.

So, I think the reason the Met Police are conducting their inquiry in this way - rather than doing the sensible thing and starting with intensive re-interviewing of the Tapas 9 - is that there is political pressure on them to rubbish the PJ investigation under Amaral. The intention is to show that the original investigation was defective. That is enough for Team McCann. Their main objective is to prevent Amaral's book being published in the UK. That is the great bulwark that has to be defended.

by CynicAl Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:00 am

sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

by elasticandy Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:01 am

utahagen wrote:elasticandy wrote, "i agree with blacksmith"

In that case, elasticandy, PLEASE explain what Blacksmith was talking about in the particular column. He has ben optimistic the McCanns will be charged. Has he now changed his mind? Or does he still believe the McCanns will be charged and is dismissing those who do not believe that?

PLEASE tell me what you think Blacksmith means here!

hi - I guess im very suspicious of Mi5/SiS conspiracies - i suspect the mm disappearance is simpler but with little evidence to support a conviction. im not a blacksmith fan or any fan but on this i think he is right Mi5 would have buried this case years ago.

by Guest Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:03 am

Cynicalal have enjoyed your posts today. My feelings are quite similar.I personally don't feel that there is a cover up. I believe that SY and the PJ are working together.
Until I see a random person arrested/arguidoed, I'm.going to try to be positive.

by aiyoyo Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:07 am

It would appear the 'little bureau' is run by heartless 'little man' who abandoned comrades for his own aggrandisement.

Good luck to Amaral - yes.
Good bye - No

Good bye Bull Shit littleman !

ETA: GGS, he was binned earlier. We are not allowed recycled rubbish here.

by maebee Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:14 am

CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

Indeed. As the man himself said "We want to create information": http://www.mccannfiles.com/id306.html

GM: We want to create information that will lead to us helping find Madeleine.

I'm probably nitpicking here but apart from the "create" information. The word "helping" is unnecessary, imo. He should have said "will lead us to finding Madeleine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3k5Q7QZNfFA

I know we've all seen it a hundred times but this Mcvid tells it all about exaggerating the "abductor". From 7.00 questions from journo, who doesn't believe them. KM "I know, I found my daughter gone". (no emotion about her missing daughter, just defensive reaction to a dis-believing journo). I know more than you do" All about defending themselves. Why oh why has no journo followed up on this and asked KM to expand on what she knows more of.

by Okeydokey Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:28 am

CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

Very good analysis. I agree - it's far more about information control than about financial gain as some people like to suggest, though no doubt they'll never have to worry about the mortgage again.

Looking back I think there have been roughly four phases of information control:

1. Initial damage limitation. Planting various ideas e.g. break in, abduction, predator, "like dining in your garden", etc etc.
2. Active "on the offensive" - meet the Pope, public education, FBI, tour of European capitals, make contact with witnesses.
3. Passive - I think they hoped to gradually turn down the volume and disappear from public life.
4. Renewed defence - this has to do with Amaral's book and the need to ensure it never sees the light of day in the UK. I think we are still in that period and this is what the Met Police op is all about.

Just my personal impression.