NEW VIDEO!! - Exposing McCanns BIG LIE to the UK Public - ABDUCTION! (Re-upload with better quality)

aquila wrote:

£125 per month is a hefty burden.

It's a bloody travesty of justice and an act of extreme cowardice! 

If you can't prove innocence through fair means without the need to destroy the life of someone campaigning for justice in the name of Madeleine McCann, then you achieve nothing but proof of your own guilt!

Can't they see how transparent they are or doesn't it matter much when protected by wealthy benefactors and the best libel lawyers in the land.

Verdi wrote:

aquila wrote:

£125 per month is a hefty burden.

It's a bloody travesty of justice and an act of extreme cowardice! 

If you can't prove innocence through fair means without the need to destroy the life of someone campaigning for justice in the name of Madeleine McCann, then you achieve nothing but proof of your own guilt!

Can't they see how transparent they are or doesn't it matter much when protected by wealthy benefactors and the best libel lawyers in the land.

In my opinion your last sentence is the crux of why we are at the stage we are now and forever will be.

Nina wrote:

Verdi wrote:

aquila wrote:

£125 per month is a hefty burden.

It's a bloody travesty of justice and an act of extreme cowardice! 

If you can't prove innocence through fair means without the need to destroy the life of someone campaigning for justice in the name of Madeleine McCann, then you achieve nothing but proof of your own guilt!

Can't they see how transparent they are or doesn't it matter much when protected by wealthy benefactors and the best libel lawyers in the land.

In my opinion your last sentence is the crux of why we are at the stage we are now and forever will be.

Hmmm - Money v. Justice.  Money will always win.  What a desperate world we live in .

Beginning to end, this has always been about a precious little three year old child without a voice.  What hope is there?

Verdi wrote:

Nina wrote:

Verdi wrote:

aquila wrote:

£125 per month is a hefty burden.

It's a bloody travesty of justice and an act of extreme cowardice! 

If you can't prove innocence through fair means without the need to destroy the life of someone campaigning for justice in the name of Madeleine McCann, then you achieve nothing but proof of your own guilt!

Can't they see how transparent they are or doesn't it matter much when protected by wealthy benefactors and the best libel lawyers in the land.

In my opinion your last sentence is the crux of why we are at the stage we are now and forever will be.

Hmmm - Money v. Justice.  Money will always win.  What a desperate world we live in .

Beginning to end, this has always been about a precious little three year old child without a voice.  What hope is there?

Exactly. Nothing will ever exonerate those guilty for that precious little girl's fate and then try to hide behind a charade and point the finger of blame elsewhere to try and save their own behinds. The most evil thing is to harm a helpless child that can't defend itself and i hope those responsible rot and no amount of money is going to save their sorry selves. Their day is coming IMO. They can run but they can't really hide. From themselves that is.

Well done HiDeHo, Great job you do to try and bring truth for Madeleine once again. Kudos to you.

The defence mechanism was put in top gear long before Portugal archived the case and Goncalo Amaral's book was published..

FIGHTBACK

On Tuesday 11 September [2007] we had an 8am conference call with [international law firm Kingsley Napley]  Michael Caplan [QC], Angus McBride and Justine.  It was decided that Justine and Angus would visit the editors of the main tabloid newspapers and Angus would explain to them that there was absolutely no evidence to support our involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

Angus and Justine’s action seemed to make next to no difference and tales of blood and dogs, provided by the usual unnamed ‘sources close to the investigation’, continued to appear, augmented by talk  of supposed ‘clumps of hair’. There were erroneous reports of a ‘100 per cent match’ between samples taken from the vehicle and Madeleine’s DNA. Even if this had been true (which it turned out it wasn’t), it was perfectly feasible that Madeleine’s DNA could have been in the car for entirely innocent reasons, on clothes, toys and other items that belonged to her.

Since there was no match, the most likely explanation for the presence of particular DNA sequences in the car – and certainly a far more rational one than a dead body having been there three weeks after her disappearance – was that the DNA was mine, Gerry’s, Sean’s or Amelie’s. Since Madeleine inherited her DNA from Gerry and me (as have the twins) she possesses strands common to us all. But I guess that didn’t make for quite so good a story.

madeleine by KATE MCCANN

Angus McBride has been appointed General Counsel, News UK. He will oversee all legal activity and compliance for the business that publishes The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sun, The Sun on Sunday and the Times Literary Supplement  -  January 2016.


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

Closing the Case - July 2008

Amaral and his chums had evidently been poised to take full advantage of the long-awaited lifting of judicial secrecy. Now they really went to town: we had staged a kidnap, or Madeleine had died in our holiday apartment and we had hidden her body; we had influenced the British police and organized our campaign to mislead investigators into searching for a living child, and so on and so forth.

No longer gagged by the law, Amaral was talking more and more openly to journalists and turning up on television chat shows.  A friend in the Algarve kept us updated on his activities.  It was unpleasant and distressing to hear what he was saying, but we had to know what Madeleine was up against in Portugal.  And it was incessant.

With the best will in the world, it is hard for anyone to absorb this stuff day in, day out and remain completely objective, especially when it is never challenged or balanced by an alternative viewpoint.  It is impossible to convey, particularly to people outside Portugal who were not aware of Amaral’s behaviour, just how difficult this smear campaign was both to withstand and to counter. And we desperately needed to counter it:  we have always believed that the information that can lead us to our daughter is likely to come from Portugal.  This is where the crime was committed, after all. Blackening our names was one thing, but if people there were taken in by Amaral’s theories, they were going to think there was no point in looking for Madeleine, or in passing on any information that might be relevant.

We are quite sure that Amaral’s posturing has reduced our chances of finding her.  Why on earth would a former police officer want to convince the world that a missing child was dead – with no evidence whatsoever to support his claim? The only conclusion we could draw was that he was attempting to justify his actions while in charge of the investigation and at the same time promoting his forthcoming book to cash in on our misfortune.   It just beggars belief.

I spent many days in tears, sobbing at the injustice being done to Madeleine by the very people who should have been helping her.

There were times when I felt so incensed by the conduct of Amaral and his friends I thought I simply wouldn’t get through the pain and anger. It was utterly frustrating that there didn’t seem to be anybody in Portugal prepared to stand up against this man. Surely there were intelligent and knowledgeable people in positions of authority who could see through these offensive allegations. Why were they all staying quiet?  Was it because it wasn’t their problem?  Were they scared to speak out?  Perhaps Amaral had tapped into some kind of national subconscious desire for this to all just go away. 

The country was already reeling from a child-abuse scandal involving Casa Pia, a state-run institution for orphans and other disadvantaged children (when  this finally came to court in 2010, six men, including a TV presenter and a former UNESCO ambassador, would be convicted) – the first such case ever to be tried in Portugal.  Perhaps it was more convenient and less troubling to lay Madeleine’s disappearance at the door of her foreign parents, put an end to the matter and move on.  Who knows...

madeleine by KATE MCCANN

That gentle folk is Ms Healy's opinion of the gentleman assigned to investigate the disappearance of her own precious daughter.  The gentleman whom she and her feckless husband systematically tried to destroy body and soul.  Whether one agrees or disagrees with Mr. Amaral's summation of the investigation up to the time he was removed from the case as outlined in his book, The Truth of the Lie, he certainly doesn't deserve the wrath of an irresponsible desperate woman who failed miserably to care for her own child!

What's the term for someone who reflects their own behaviour onto another?  This book is a mine field for self destruction - just goes to show the extent of conspiracy unleashed to cover the truth behind the mystery of Madeleine McCann.

NOTE:  If it's inappropriate to post a huge chunk of the novel please delete.

I spent many days in tears, sobbing at the injustice being done to Madeleine by the very people who should have been helping her.


You KM are one of the very first people who should have helped her, by asssisting the police who were looking for her. You were sobbing at the "injustice" done to her by those who were searching for her? Days after your daughter's disappearance you were jogging, not sobbing. You are a disgrace of a human being.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] says.....What's the term for someone who reflects their own behaviour onto another?...Psychological projection. Or in other words, blatant and bare-faced hypocrisy.

Cmaryholmes wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] says.....What's the term for someone who reflects their own behaviour onto another?...Psychological projection. Or in other words, blatant and bare-faced hypocrisy.

Ahhh, is that what it's called.  I was thinking more on the lines of a narcistic personailty disorder..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
'Echo and Narcissus' - more informally known as 'Kate and Gerry'

Verdi wrote:

Cmaryholmes wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] says.....What's the term for someone who reflects their own behaviour onto another?...Psychological projection. Or in other words, blatant and bare-faced hypocrisy.

Ahhh, is that what it's called.  I was thinking more on the lines of a narcistic personailty disorder..

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
'Echo and Narcissus' - more informally known as 'Kate and Gerry'

Aaaah, the pre-raphaelites, my absolute favourite painters!
Mccanns- Narcissistic individuals indeed!