***NEW - Reply received from Mike Penning M.P., Home Office, 6 Jun 2016*** (was: Reasons why the public need a report on Operation Grange: The letter handed in to Prime Minister, David Cameron, on 29 April 2016 in support of the petition

aquila wrote:
It's out there for posterity and when this whole thing is exposed remember who wrote this letter and where you read it.

haroldd2 wrote:
Exton's Belgian connections may prove to be relevant...

Marc Dutroux has made an awful lot of money in prison, supposedly having become skilful in dealing in shares and, doubtless, I should imagine also forex and futures and derivatives and stuff. It's not easy to make an awful lot of money unless you start off with a lot of it. It's extremely difficult.

Anders Breivik also made a lot of money in such financial "plays", using his small company with its footprint in a number of countries dotted around the world.

How strange that these two men should have such skills.

Not much about Exton is known, but Bindmans solicitors tried to suppress mention of his MI5 background, mentioning the Official Secrets Act and a DA-Notice in their letter to Paulo Reis and others. The curious thing is that since breach of the OSA is a crime, i.e. a wrong against the state, and not at all similar to libel or breach of copyright, which are civil wrongs and suitable matters for solicitors acting for private persons to write letters about, enforcement of the OSA is supposed to be a matter for the state - for example through the Treasury Solicitor. WTF? Did Bindmans notify the TSO, or MI5's lawyer, that the OSA had been breached? Surely they must have done.

Beware the idea of "Walter Mittys". Portraying someone as a Walter Mitty is one of the known limitation strategies.

We seem to be in the murky area where spookery overlaps big-time with international crime.

Which is what I had already surmised from the identity of one of the individuals who was staying in PdL at the time Madeleine "disappeared", and from the stated fact that Mark Warner Enterprises made no on-the-books profits for 16 years, while running luxury holidays, starting in Switzerland.

Margaret Hodge was chair of the Public Accounts Committee for nine years, helping the government get "value for money" and making sure "public money" didn't, er, go to waste. Much of her billionaire-bracket family's wealth was held using structures in Liechtenstein and Panama.

Get what I'm saying?

Meanwhile, Philip Green, who pocketed £500 million and then left BHS to go bust, much of whose  wealth is in Jersey-registered assets owned by his Monaco-resident wife, also played a crucial role "examining government spending".

Hodge's and Green's public-sector roles are very juicy if you can get them. There is a reason that these positions go to billionaire-bracket international business types who hold their money hidden offshore, rather than to individuals having more or less 9-5 workaday mundane bureaucratic CVs who live off their salaries plus maybe double or triple salary in entertainment and expenses and backhanders, but who are nowhere near the world of the billionaires.

Green "lent his private jet" to take the McCanns to see Pope Joseph Ratzinger. The Vatican Bank has large investments in Big Pharma. That is not going to be a fact of which Philip Green is unaware.

Just mentioning this stuff as background to WHY the McCann case has been considered, for several years, to be worth such a high level of involvement by the British state to develop false leads, and, well, to get to the point, to prevent the truth coming out.

MayMuse wrote:I agree with you @Verdi & your post makes such great sense... 
However, 
"The UK authorities have seriously compromised their position in this case"



Why would they do this, if it wasn't for some form of "cover-up"? 
What could they potentially gain or not gain ? 


This is what goes around in my head trying to make sense.
I cannot come up with a "reasonable" answer! 


No wonder people are so "baffled" with it all. 

MayMuse wrote:

Joss wrote:

MayMuse wrote:I agree with you @Verdi & your post makes such great sense... 
However, 
"The UK authorities have seriously compromised their position in this case"



Why would they do this, if it wasn't for some form of "cover-up"? 
What could they potentially gain or not gain ? 


This is what goes around in my head trying to make sense.
I cannot come up with a "reasonable" answer! 


No wonder people are so "baffled" with it all. 

BBM, I think the whole cover up is more to do with G.M. and who he is and who is connected with, that is the only reasonable explanation i can think of. They had a "disaster" alright in Portugal, and it was probably an "OMG what are we going to do now, our lives will be ruined" moment that the McC's had in regard to Madeleine on their trip to Portugal and what actually happened to their daughter. They had to get into damage control mode immediately, so lots of frantic calls back to the U.K. and the authorities in the U.K. bailed them out of their dilemma fairly promptly, IMO.

That would mean that GM would have some form of a "hold" on the UK government? Like I have said I cannot come up with a "reasonable" answer; what sort of "power" could GM have to bring all of that "support" in at a moments notice?

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:It was John McCann who said they were "calling in favours".

Favours in return for what?

Joss wrote:

MayMuse wrote:

Joss wrote:

MayMuse wrote:I agree with you @Verdi & your post makes such great sense... 
However, 
"The UK authorities have seriously compromised their position in this case"



Why would they do this, if it wasn't for some form of "cover-up"? 
What could they potentially gain or not gain ? 


This is what goes around in my head trying to make sense.
I cannot come up with a "reasonable" answer! 


No wonder people are so "baffled" with it all. 

BBM, I think the whole cover up is more to do with G.M. and who he is and who is connected with, that is the only reasonable explanation i can think of. They had a "disaster" alright in Portugal, and it was probably an "OMG what are we going to do now, our lives will be ruined" moment that the McC's had in regard to Madeleine on their trip to Portugal and what actually happened to their daughter. They had to get into damage control mode immediately, so lots of frantic calls back to the U.K. and the authorities in the U.K. bailed them out of their dilemma fairly promptly, IMO.

That would mean that GM would have some form of a "hold" on the UK government? Like I have said I cannot come up with a "reasonable" answer; what sort of "power" could GM have to bring all of that "support" in at a moments notice?

COMARE perhaps? Or is GM a Freemason, because there are Masons in Govt. from what i have read, and don't they all cover for each other? The "Brotherhood" and all that.

pennylane wrote:I too believe COMARE / EDF energy are high on the list as to a potential reason for the protection.  It's also interesting to note that Gerry McCann quietly disappeared off the COMARE subcommittee soon after the disappearance!

Tony Bennett wrote:

pennylane wrote:I too believe COMARE / EDF energy are high on the list as to a potential reason for the protection.  It's also interesting to note that Gerry McCann quietly disappeared off the COMARE subcommittee soon after the disappearance!

@ pennylane & @ Estelle

For those thinking that the COMARE connection might be the answer to the riddle, there is of course a very interesting connection to the nuclear energy industry via leading Lancashire Freemason, Edward Smethurst, the McCanns' co-ordinating lawyer from the beginning (and Director of Madeleine's Fund).

Smethurst's first real job, back in the 1990s, was as a junior lawyer in the Legal Department of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL). He was appointed to that job by Alvin Shuttleworth, an even more senior fellow Freemason in the East Lancashire Provincial Lodge.

Shuttleworth was the Head of BNFL's Legal Department at the time. The two men became engaged in a very successful campaign to deny compensation to many families, especially those with young children, who claimed to have developed leukaemia due to living so long close to the Sellafield nuclear reactor in Cumbria.

But if anything, that points not so much to COMARE and nuclear energy but to the possible role of senior Freemasons working on the Madeleine McCann case. The McCanns' bizarre action, lying prostrate before the GNR police when they arrived at the Ocean Club, was a copybook repetition of an ancient Masonic symbol of severe distress - a direct appeal to any Masonic police in the Portuguese police.

Then again the McCanns' friendship with the pervert Ray Wyre might suggest other influences.

But then we have strayed   more than a bit            

 

r