The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post new topic   Reply to topic

Page 9 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Textusa: New knight in town

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 21.05.17 14:27

Friday, 19 May 2017



New knight in town



1. Introduction

“A man [or anybody for that matter] is known by the company he keeps” – Aesop

We have waited to see who Ian Horrocks was associated with before giving an opinion on his latest opining about what happened to Maddie in a post called exactly “What happened to Madeleine McCann?” on a website called BGP-Global services.

If dung was truffles, Horrocks’ production would be auctioned at Sothebys for an absurd amount of money such would be the competition to get the hands on such a rare, exquisite and refined piece of crap.

Before too long, on May 4th, Martin Brunt was retweeting Horrocks latest offering.

Not surprisingly, Summers and Swann are also following Horrocks on twitter.


2. Horrocks and the dogs

And even for a creator of platinum-quality twaddle like Horrocks is, he summarily ditches Edgar’s theories and the bungled burglary in just a half a paragraph:

“The talk of Madeleine being kidnapped by a paedophile ring, or people traffickers, for a client in some distant place, or some of the even more far-fetched theories may be worth discussion, but are not in my opinion credible. Likewise, the idea that a random burglar suddenly deciding to take a child instead of valuables is also unlikely.”

Horrocks libels Portugal by stating as truthful something that has been absolutely and completely denied by the Portuguese authorities: “In saying that, there were a number of instances of burglary throughout that part of the Algarve that were not investigated adequately. Some of these involved sex attacks against young children.”

The following exchange of tweets about the importance of the dogs’ findings Horrocks mentions in his blog post – “The farcical conspiracy theory that the last photo of Madeleine was photo shopped, the spurious and often inaccurately reported forensic findings, the irrelevant behaviour of the cadaver dogs” – is quite interesting to read:

P_R @Papa___Rico
"Irrelevant" cadaver dogs? Do relatives of disaster victims recovered by these highly trained animals agree with your peculiar view? #McCann
Inserted:
Ian @BGPGlobalWhat happened to Madeleine McCann? My view. (link: http://www.bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madeleine-mccann-2/) bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madel… #MadeleineMcCann
9:30 AM · 14 May 2017”

Ian @BGPGlobal
Replying to @Papa___Rico
Irrelevant behaviour in these specific circumstances. Cadaver dogs are excellent and a valuable resource. Thanks for the comment
11:42 AM · 16 de mai de 2017”

Horrocks is very clear that cadaver dogs are excellent and a valuable resources, except only when it comes to the specific circumstances of the McCanns.


3. What Horrocks thinks happened to Maddie

In short, Horrocks has no evidence about what happened to Madeleine; just a belief that she was taken by somebody unspecified who probably spoke English and that she is still alive, somewhere unspecified.

One of the reasons he states for his belief that the parents were in no way involved is, believe it or not, because there is no family history!

“The thought that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the death of their daughter, whether being directly responsible, or covering up an accident, is as far as I am concerned frankly preposterous. Although many believe this, as far as I am aware, there is not one shred of credible evidence, either direct or otherwise to indicate that this is even a remote possibility.

There are many reasons for saying this. Firstly, and importantly, there is no family history that would point in any way to this.”

Is this a new profiling discovery we are unaware of?

Could it be because there’s no similar McCann/Healy family history that involve cadaver and blood dogs that makes Horrocks believes the dogs to be irrelevant. Maybe to him due to the lack of family history every time the dogs barked were always false positives.

We urge (NOT) the British authorities to immediately do a survey among all prisoners, from the commonest criminal to the most heinous ones, and ask each and any of them if anyone in their family had done a similar thing. If not, release them at once as they are, according to Horrocks, evidently innocent.

This is probably also true of many people convicted of serious crimes, including Dr Shipman and completely irrelevant.

Is Horrocks party to the criminal history (or lack of) of the relatives of both parents? As a retired officer, can he access the criminal records’ database? Given that the answer should be NO, how can he state this with any certainty?

Anne Guedes with “IAN HORROCKS 2 MADELEINE MCCANN REPORTS 03/07/2012 & 14/10/2013 COMPARISON” has provided a very useful comparison of 2 articles written by Horrocks in 2012 and 2013, showing how he made adjustments to the 2013 article in the light of Redwood’s belief that Tannerman was probably an innocent dad taking his own child home.


4. Horrocks and his friends

This is not the first time we speak of Horrocks. We spoke of him in our post of June 5 2012 “Friends reunited”.

Now Horrocks negates Edgar, who in 2017 maintains that Maddie disappeared as a result of sexual motives but does support Edgar who in 2009 maintains she was taken by a caring couple..

We have since corrected in our post “Blackmail” what we had said in that post about Andy Redwood.

As far as we are aware, Andy Redwood was not involved with Ian Horrocks, Hamish Campbell or Simon Foy in the investigation of the Jill Dando case.

The coincidence between the 2 cases is that Campbell and Foy were part of Operation Grange in the earlier stages.

Out of curiosity we can add that the journalist referred to in the post, Mazher Mahmood, was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment for conspiring to pervert the course of justice in October 2016.

It seems Horrocks congratulations to the News of the World for their story was questionable, given the circumstances.

Commander Simon Foy has recently expressed his opinion about the case to Richard Bilton on Panorama on May 3rd 2017, with much negative head shaking, you knows and over- earnest attempts to be convincing:.

Foy: “Even on the first glance of what we looked at, and when we took the information back and ran it through our own understanding and you know, verified sightings and accounts and statements and all the rest of it, it was perfectly clear to us that the McCanns themselves had nothing at all to do with the actual disappearance.” [that last sentence may be true as it refers to disappearance only]

Bilton: “Why?”

Foy: “Because, because It was just obvious from the, you know, that everything stacked up that  they, you know, they were where they said they were when the child went missing.”

It seems Foy and Horrocks are still singing from the same hymn sheet.


5. Sutton and Horrocks

Enter the scene Colin Sutton, on Twitter about Horrocks’ drivel:

SilverLining @Ev3ryCloud
@colinsutton Seems former Chief Insp. of Met Ian Horrocks has this take on Madeleine #McCann ...Any thoughts?
Inserted
What happened to Madeleine McCann? - BGP Global Servicesbgpglobalservices.com
1:52 PM · 16 May 2017”

Colin Sutton @colinsutton
Replying to @Ev3ryCloud
We've spoken, we disagree on a number of things but he is a good man and I respect his right to have and voice his opinion, of course.
1:57 PM · 16 May 2017”

SilverLining @Ev3ryCloud
Replying to @colinsutton
Thank you for your response, appreciated. We all have right to voice opinion, but to ignore obvious is alarming? #McCann
2:02 PM · 16 de mai de 2017”

Quite a surprisingly evasive and dismissive answer, from the newest hero in town to what is an article evidently filled with absurd falsities.

As SilverLining correctly put it, ignoring the obvious is ALARMING.

Is it just us or there is something rather strange about the conversations going on between these former police officers, the links between some of them and the involvement of Martin Brunt in promoting Horrocks’ opinions on twitter?


6. New knight in town

“Shalt thou speak against the McCanns and thine is the glory, the respect and the awe owed to a hero by his fellow citizens”

This is an effective motto used by some to fool many. And it does fool many.

Remember Katie “we will never know what happened to Maddie” Hopkins?

Or Karen “I’ll be sued by the McCanns because I dared to say they were neglectful” Danczuk?

Where are they now?

So it was sufficient for Colin Sutton to have as a headline “UK detective refused to head up Madeleine McCann probe because 'Scotland Yard would order him to prove Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignore other leads'” to be considered the new knight in shining armour riding into town on his white horse.

The subtitles of that particular article were very clear what it was all about:

“- Colin Sutton said he was warned by senior friend in the Met about case in 2010

- Friend said he would be told 'who to talk to and what to investigate', he claimed

- 'Narrow focus' would be to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent, he said”

The wording is very clear: James Dunn, has stated that Colin Sutton said a senior friend in the Met told Sutton about the case in 2010 that Sutton would be told who to talk to and what to investigate because the narrow focus would be to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent.

This is not a ‘source of the family’, nor is it a ‘source of the police’, this is James Dunn transcribing what Colin Sutton told him.

Exactly what Colin Sutton said a senior friend in the Met had told him.

Mr Sutton has no complaints about what was written in the Daily Mail article, in fact on May 8 he praises the courage of the Daily Mail in publishing the story.

Colin Sutton @colinsutton
Replying to  @McCannCaseTweet
1- I hoped Grange was doing other work in the background; 2- When I decided to speak it took a while to find an MSM outlet who would listen.
10:33 PM · 8 May 2017”

On May 9, in his blog, in a post called “Madeleine McCann and Operation Grange” he starts to correct his hand slightly by saying :

“However, before this, just a few days after the NotW story I did receive a call from a senior officer in the Met whom I knew quite well.  This officer told me I would do better to avoid the McCann investigation if it did happen, because "You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not".

That is the totality of the advice I received. It was made clear that this was an ‘unofficial’ call and that it was made in my interest – so that I might not end up taking on a task which would ultimately frustrate me.  As such I never pressed the caller for more information, nor will I ever be in a position to disclose who the officer was.”

Here, the friend no longer says that the ‘narrow focus’ would be to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent. He just said “an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not”.

But the Daily Mail’s article says: “The source [the high-ranking friend] warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory, he [Sutton] claims.”

Either is Mr Sutton is lying in his blog or James Dunn is doing that when he writes that Sutton claims what is said he claimed.

Either one, the other or both have to be accountable for what was written. We will see the importance of this later on.

Sutton confirms in his blog that this conversation took place over the phone as the Mail says it did: “Colin Sutton said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him and warned him not to lead the case when Scotland Yard announced it would get involved in 2010.”

Basically the scenario described by Sutton is that of someone trying to recruit someone to head Operation Grange, apparently one high-ranking Met officer had refused – we don’t know how many others did the same as the article does not clarify that – and that one officer out of friendship called Sutton to warn him how biased such an investigation would be.

We will overlook the friend’s absolute lack of trust in Sutton’s morality demonstrated by that high-ranking Met officer, as he advises against – so admits it possible – Sutton accepting such a morally corrupt investigation.

It seems that he, the one high-ranking Met officer, had the good sense to make the decision of refusing such a task all by himself, so why advise Sutton? Didn’t he trust Sutton to do the same and decide for himself as well?

If that one high-ranking Met officer couldn’t be the recruiter otherwise the scenario would be one of hey pal, I’m going to invite you to accept something which I strongly advise you don’t…


7. Question that was asked

We must confess that once we saw that the headline was on the Daily Mail, we smelled a rat. A huge rat, at that.

But before we debunk this alleged conversation between Sutton and his friend, let’s understand how realistic it is in the first place.

To be a minimally realistic scenario it had to be able to answer this question: was it possible for Operation Grange to have been set up to clear the McCanns?

The answer is an evident no, because if that was possible it would have been closed a long time ago.

And the key words in the sentence above are “if that was possible”.

We are certain that in 2010, a time when no newspaper article online about Maddie and/or the Mccanns accepted any comments from their readers, it would be obvious to whoever would be deciding that the couple was not popular at all as everyone believed they were guilty, at the very least, of neglect and no one believed there was an abduction.

With this background, to pursue a project that would make – note, not attempt to make – the McCanns innocent would be a very serious decision to take.

Whoever was responsible for such a decision, would demand to see with their own eyes how the whole thing could be pulled off.

We, who are familiar with the files, can see immediately that to officially clear the McCanns was, and is, an impossible task.

There is no possible storyline that takes the McCanns out of the picture.

Note that these conversations, briefings or meetings would be circumscribed to the highest political level.

One must remember that by 2010 Team McCann had been able to ‘convince’ the general public that the couple had been cleared by the Portuguese justice system, and whoever tried to say otherwise risked facing the heaviest of libel axes.

In 2010, the Maddie case was an absolute sleeping dog.

Only we in this blog and very few others still spoke about it on the net and the case was tending to dwindle away quite quickly.

So why take such a high unnecessary risk against popular opinion without the absolute certainty of success?

If that certainty existed, then Operation Grange would have lasted only a few months and the McCanns would quickly have been cleared officially by the British justice system and we know that hasn’t happened 6 years after it was launched.

This lapse of time tells us that no one proposed to the higher political echelons a sure-fire way to exonerate the McCanns.

If such was not proposed, as we are certain it wasn’t, the government wouldn’t embarked in such adventure.

But something we do know is that Operation Grange was launched, so it must have been another reason that motivated the government to have done so.


8. Let’s suppose it was possible

But let’s suppose someone found such a possibility – which our intelligence cannot think up – one that would “prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine innocent.”

Then someone has to tell us why on earth would Gamble be forced out by resignation in October?

Note that one of the subtitles of the Mail article says this:

“- [Sutton] Spoke on Sky Documentary based on leaked Home Office report that revealed 'turbulent relationship' between McCanns and police in London and Portugal”

The report requested from Gamble by the Home Office which we spoke of in our post “Sky News - The clarifying report”.

For some reason the Home office requested such a report from CEOP and not from the Leicestershire Constabulary nor from the Met. It shows clearly that until then Gamble had been the operational leader then with whatever had to do with Maddie.

It showed that it was Gamble, the head of CEOP, who coordinated the various British police forces involved in the Maddie case.

CEOP – Child Exploitation Online Protection was nationally coordinating a case, in which before Robert Murat was named arguido, the only computer involved was one which the Moyes lent to the Gerry for him to use.

So, does it make any sense at all that if the political deciders wanted a biased investigation to clear the McCanns would force off the case – by forcing him out of CEOP on October 2010 - the man who most knew about the case?

No it doesn’t make any sense at all.

And does it make any sense that if the idea was to prove the McCanns innocent that it would be allowed for Kate to write a self-incriminatory book?

A book filled with inconsistencies from what there is on the files?

Of course not, it would be throwing a pile of wood into the bonfire to see the flames grow brighter.

Besides, an attempt to whitewash the McCanns image had already been tried in 2009 with the 2009 Channel 4 Mockumentary with disastrous results.

Who can forget the Gerry/Tanner discrepancy between which side of the street Jez and Gerry were? Jane says it was on the left, Gerry says it’s on the right and Edgar, the referee, informs Jane she is much lower down on the food chain than Gerry, and so decided that it had been on the right even though the files states specifically that it was on the left.

If the idea was to clear the McCanns, their silence would be pivotal.

No book, no interviews, only experts would be allowed to communicate the ‘findings’.

The sleeping dog would be awoken just to be put to sleep as quickly as possible.

Kate’s book is a footprint that will never wash away in this case.

And if the idea was to prove the McCanns innocent, would everything fall silent immediately after Operation Grange was launched?

Kate aged years in those days, the Sun did not serialise the book as it had promised to do, Operation Grange said absolutely nothing and Maddie and the McCanns were wiped from the media for months with the exception of a piece about the Indian Maddie – remember her? – in July if we’re not mistaken.

If the issue had been studied as it surely would have been, then a well-oiled and coordinated machine would be rolling smoothly as planned.

But the contrary happened. It was evident from day one that something went immediately wrong with Grange.

That can only mean one thing: whatever was intended was quickly realised was not possible. And that realisation came after the operation was launched.


9. Question that was not asked

We believe that happened because the real the remit of Operation Grange was the exact opposite of what Collin Sutton has stated: it was to prove Kate, Gerry and Tapas Nine were guilty.

To be logical and coherent, if the remit was what we say it was, to prove the T9 guilty, a similar question would have to have been asked like the one we spoke of before: was it possible for Operation Grange to have been set up to find the McCanns guilty?

We believe such a question was indeed asked and it was answered almost immediately: of course!

After all, in September 2007 the McCanns were literally yanked out of Portugal because there was more than enough evidence to condemn them if there had not been any political interference as we know there was.

The FSS report had to do a sudden U-turn on forensics and produce something totally specious.

So when that question was asked and got a very quick and assertive answer, the questions stopped being about whether the objective was reachable but about how and where and when to achieve it.

As Rebekah Brooks was involved in the process, we are certain David Cameron was convinced that the 4th anniversary would be best for dramatic effects.

In this scenario “let’s get the McCanns”, forcing Gamble off the boat makes sense. He worked for those protecting the couple and so represented an obstacle rather than any sort of added value.

Kate’s book also makes sense. As said above, it was highly self-incriminatory and would serve as further evidence against the evil couple.

So, those of us who followed the case in 2010/2011, the commemorations of that 4th anniversary started around the last quarter of 2010, with the announcement of the book being written and then all went into a crescendo, a noticeable one, through the first 4 months of 2011 in anticipation of the publication of the book.

And then it was published.

And it was a dud.

Why?

Because as we have explained in our post “Monkeys in business” the 2010/2011 Deciders were not that same ones and most of the ‘monkeys’ who had fought valiantly for the other side had either left or were different.

What no one remembered in 2010 to ask was the most essential question: is it possible to prove the T9 guilty, them and only them?

The answer, is no, it’s not possible.

And that was what it was painfully discovered AFTER they launched Operation Grange.


10. The stalemate

We think Cameron walked off the ‘podium’ after announcing Grange and told May, right, go get and charge them.

What immense political gains he would get from arresting the vile McCanns and close once and for all the Maddie case!

May, we think, in turn turned to Bernard Hogan-Howe and told him the same, and so down the hierarchy went down the message went, until it reached the person who sat at the computer and was tasked to type the charges.

Then, that person asked their superior what exactly the charges were and the superior replied oh, for God’s sake charge them with having killed Maddie and then… then that they took the body… the body to… hmmm, let me see… the body… ooops, we have a major problem! Let me ask my boss.

And up the hierarchy the question went and no one was able to answer it.

Thus the stalemate of 2011.

The McCanns suddenly realised they were being hunted which made Kate McCann age in days the equivalent of years when she realised she had been fooled into writing her own entrapment.

The other side quickly realised the true remit was to hunt the McCanns and were reeling by it.

The government found itself with a problem that it couldn’t solve.

No one knew what to do and no one did anything.


11. The first signs

We on the blog saw that the tide was turning in 2010 when the 6-cleaner story broke out. It was the first time someone outside the T9 was being involved in the case.

The other side responded and played a very, very high card: the make-up photo.

It’s not by chance that this photo appears only in 2010.

The problem for the other side was that the government misunderstood its message, or better said, failed to see the full picture, so to speak.

It misunderstood the message to the point of thinking there was no problem at all in continuing and so decided to do so  and let’s go get the McCanns operation it had set out to launch was fired away… and ooops.

We apologise to our readers but this little bit is for only a very few readers who we know fully understand us and please do not ask us to expand it any further.


12. Colin Sutton and the truth

All we have mentioned above shows very clearly that Colin Sutton is being very economical with the truth when he says that the objective of Operation Grange was to prove the McCanns innocent.

If one reads the opening paragraph of his blog, one can see that truth is not exactly his main objective:

“At the outset I should say that I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann.  All the evidence available to me – and there is more and deeper information available to the public on this than any case I have looked at – does not convince me of any theory or scenario being proved.  Soon, in the coming months when my other projects are less busy, I hope to take a proper analytical look at it all and come up with some conclusions.  But as things stand my position is that I don't know.”

Anyone minimally interested in the case and it seems he has read a lot about it “All the evidence available to me – and there is more and deeper information available to the public on this than any case I have looked at” may speculate on how, why, when, where and by whose hand Maddie died but there’s one absolute certainty: Maddie is dead.

“I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann”, says Sutton.

Everyone genuinely seeking the truth knows Maddie is dead. It has been said in headlines and no one has been sued or threatened to be sued because of it.

Where is it all leading? Is Sutton really expressing genuine doubts about the exclusion of the McCanns as potential suspects?

Will Sutton and Horrocks reach a meeting of minds on the case or is it about self-publicity, with both eventually claiming they would have been able to solve the case if Operation Grange reaches no conclusions?

Forgive our scepticism, but when something just doesn’t feel right, we say so.


13. The role of Sutton

We think Sutton has 2 objectives.

His main one, and in which he was successful we will speak of in a later post, when we will speak about the BBC Panorama programme.

His second objective was as we said, to undermine the Operation Grange degrading by its credibility.

We recommend readers to read our post “The McCann trial” to understand that it would help pass the message that the McCanns have been punished enough and as Operation Grange was a mess from its start, best say that things are out of control and the best thing is to archive the whole thing and restart with a confidential process that will only move along in case there’s new evidence.

To have Operation Grange do after 6 years what the Portuguese did after 18 months.


14. The libellous Sutton

Now, it must be said that Colin Sutton may bring some very consequences onto himself as what he is saying is that David Cameron and Theresa May launched a morally corrupt investigation intentionally.

That’s libellous.

The reader may say that Gamble did worse by calling May a liar under oath on Panorama.

As we will explain when we do a post on the BBC Panorama post, neither Gamble or May lied.

In fact, that may have been be the most important moment of the entire Panorama programme.

But Colin Sutton is clearly libelling May and Cameron.

Maybe, or probably, that’s the reason why he backs off in the article by the Australian 9news by Mark Saunokonoko, published May 15 2017 “UK police guilty of flawed tunnel vision in hunt for Maddie McCann answers, former top cop says”:

“In 2010, with planning underway to launch Operation Grange, Sutton received a phone tip off from “a very senior Metropolitan police officer”, warning him about the looming investigation and how it would be handled.

The insider told Sutton, who served 30 years with London's Met before retiring in 2011, that the dozens of murder detectives assigned to Operation Grange would be instructed where they could and couldn't look.

“I immediately assumed that what was meant was that the [McCann] family and Tapas 7 [the group of seven friends on holiday with the McCanns] were a no-go area,” Sutton said.”

Sutton now assumes, and is no longer certain, that the “You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could notwas about proving the McCanns being innocent, so he could be wrong, after all assumptions are just assumptions.


15. Conclusion

We continue to urge people to be very wary of the many Pied Pipers that abound.

In terms of the game, it seems to be going well.

The Panorama programme was a very interesting move but we will leave that for a future post.



POST SCRIPTUM:

We would like readers to watch the following video, although all of it is interesting to watch, from 02:29 onwards:


We would say that Sutton, who according to his own words got to know in 2010, that the Operation Grange was totally biased in proving the innocence of the McCanns and their friends, was strangely optimistic and rather cooperative with the circus Operation Grange had set up in Luz in 2014.

Also interesting to read the following exchange of tweets:

SilverLining @Ev3ryCloud
Replying to @Ev3ryCloud and @YouTube
@colinsutton How come you were in PDL 2014 for dig for Madeleine #McCann Thought you only involved past few months for interviews/skydocu?

 “Colin Sutton @colinsutton
Replying to @Ev3ryCloud and @YouTube
I was working with ITV news, on procedures and what was happening there and then, not discussing 2007.
11:00 PM · 18 May 2017”


The video is from the Telegraph but Sutton says clearly on his tweets that then, in 2014, he was working for ITV.

In 2017 it's the Daily Mail giving him visibility.
avatar
Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 10158
Reputation : 5118
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Colin Sutton on TV.

Post by willowthewisp on 21.05.17 15:59

Hi GoGetEmGoncalo,so Colin Sutton,who was "Advised"to not become involved with Operation Grange wonderfully written Remit 2010?
you can deduce just how much Mr Sutton has dedicated time to evaluate Madeleine McCann's disappearance since his retirement.
2010 Retires from Police Force,Actively involved with ITV 2014 then appears in the Broadcast video(Operation Grange)2012-13?
Now since January 2017 has become to the forefront of most of the "Red Tops",Operation Grange-Remit,some what strange for a "Person Advised"not to become involved in Operation Grange,to then suddenly Pop Up in so many situations with regard to Madeleine McCann's reported disappearance 3 May 2007?
People will come up with the idea,that Mr Sutton never actually retired but was able to work,surreptitiously behind the scenes?
which is not uncommon to the Metropolitan Police force,only if your a reporter trying to obtain information of Police undercover Work and the Malpractice affecting the work,Dead babies Names addresses,etc?
What is your Modus Operandi,Mr Colin Sutton?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1937
Reputation : 772
Join date : 2015-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Tony Bennett on 21.05.17 17:32

Get'emGonçalo wrote:

Friday, 19 May 2017









New knight in town










1. Introduction

“A man [or anybody for that matter] is known by the company he keeps” – Aesop

We have waited to see who Ian Horrocks was associated with before giving an opinion on his latest opining about what happened to Maddie in a post called exactly “What happened to Madeleine McCann?” on a website called BGP-Global services.

If dung was truffles, Horrocks’ production would be auctioned at Sothebys for an absurd amount of money such would be the competition to get the hands on such a rare, exquisite and refined piece of crap.

Before too long, on May 4th, Martin Brunt was retweeting Horrocks latest offering.

Not surprisingly, Summers and Swann are also following Horrocks on Twitter...

SNIPPED
This post, which I've snipped, was of course from Textusa.

I would like to thank both Textusa and Anne Guedes.

Textusa I will thank for finding for us the video of Colin Sutton pontificating (well, saying nothing at all actually) about the Madeleine case, sent to Portugal for the 2014 'dig', and paid good money and expenses for doing so. It becomes clearer than ever that this man is what is known as 'a safe pair of hands'. A man who will say exactly what the media want him to say.

I also want to thank Anne Guedes for her analysis of Sutton's pronouncements which appear to show a degree of inconsistency. Textusa has reproduced her analysis in the post above: "New Knight in Town".   

I am afraid it tends to reinforce my earlier view that Sutton is basically a prostitute.

When I first mentioned this word in connection with Sutton, there was some consternation. Verdi, however, quickly produced this dictionary definition of a prosttuue:

"to sell oneself (artistic or moral integrity) for low or unworthy purposes".

Today I found another definition:

"to put (oneself or one's talents) to an unworthy or corrupt use or purpose for the sake of personal or financial gain.

These are the facts about Sutton.

1. He says he was clearly warned by 'a very senior Met Police Officer' in 2010 that Operation Grange was a corrupt investigation from the start in that (a) it had a limited remit and (b) it would rule out the McCanns as suspects to be investigated.

2. Despite this, he accepted 30 pieces of silver from the media the following year (2011) for commenting on what he then represented as a genuine investigation

3. We now know (thanks to Textusa) that he did the same again in 2014 when he went out for another week in Portugal - again offering his very bland views on the case and never a word about being warned that this was a seriously flawed investigation from the start

4. Once again he did the same thing this year, being quoted by the media making more bland comments on the case.  

Despite all of the above, he has had the effrontery more recently to claim that he 'doesn't really know much about the case' and 'hasn't looked into it in depth' etc. etc.

Prior to being outed as CMOMM member 'oatlandish' back on 22 April, the forum owner asked Sutton what his opinion on the case was. This was his reply:



He defended himself on the forum by saying he was really interested in the case and would be coming here to comment after the SKY News show about Madeleine McCann. He was subject to a certain amount of criticism by CMOMM members who doubted his sincerity.

He then, IIRC on 3 May, appeared on SKY News in an interview with Martin Brunt where he made these statements:

A. A very senior police office in the Met had told him that Operation Grange would not be a proper, normal review/investigation i.e it would have a limited remit and the McCanns would be 100% ruled out of any involvement whatsoever in Madeleine's disappearance

B. There were inconsistencies in the statements of the McCanns and their Tapas 7 statements which needed to be looked at.

This prompted great admiration from forum members, like this comment from 'onspirespirit':

"I thought he was excellent last night. Very fair. Well done Colin. Maybe some people owe him an apology. They were very quick to judge, even when he asked them to wait and see the Sky documentary before forumulating an opinion".

Well, I am not going to offer Sutton an apology. Yes, he made the above comments, and for those I will give him one cheer.

But regarding comment (A) above, we have no proof of what was said to him, and by whom. Moreover, despite what he says he was told in 2010, he went on the telly time after time, taking media money and expenses to basically tow the party line. And let it be noted that he only came out with those statements to Brunt after he had been taken to task first here on CMOMM. Was he embarrassed perhaps that he had said nothing about Grange being a flawed investigation for seven whole years?

Regarding comment (B) above, it is as weak as he could possibly make it. Sutton spent most of the day on the forum a few weeks back reading most of PeteMac's e-book. Sutton must know that there are not 'some inconsistencies' but dirty great big contradictions and changes of story all over the place. 

No, Sutton is little different from the others in that 'Coterie of Shame' that he seems to belong to, or 'The Gamble Network'...Mark Williams-Thomas, Dr Joe Sullivan, Ian Horrocks etc. etc.

==========

Finally, reverting to Textusa's post, he started off well.

But half-way down his convoluted mind dreamed up the idea that, all along, Operation Grange was a cunning plan by David Cameron, Theresa May and Bernard Hogan-Howe to 'get the McCanns'.

As with all the stuff about vertical lines in Gerry's sunglasses in the Last Photo, it's a useful reminder of the sheer rubbish he can spout at ttimes.

And he still insists, over 10 years on, despite all the evidence to the contrary, that Madeleine died suddenly after 6pm on Thursday 3 May, and that they all planned and executed an exotic abduction hoax before 10pm the same evening, most of which was spent enjoying tapas and alcohol in the Tapas restaurant.             


.

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14700
Reputation : 2831
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by MayMuse on 21.05.17 17:53

It was a tweeter who found the video & directed questions to Colin Sutton. Textusa then used the tweeters information in the blog.

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.”

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007

MayMuse

Posts : 1678
Reputation : 1202
Join date : 2016-04-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by MayMuse on 21.05.17 20:42

New info over on Textusa... addendum 

Top cop spearheads new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

By Lucy Panton, NoW Crime Editor

BRITAIN'S top murder cop has been lined up to spearhead a new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, we can reveal.

Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton,
 49, who has been involved in some of the UK's biggest inquiries - including the murder of Milly Dowler and the terror reign of the Nightstalker sex beast - is seen as the best man to handle the challenging review.

Senior child protection officer Jim Gamble has asked Scotland Yard to take a fresh look at the three-year investigation.

He blasted Portuguese cops for their handling of the hunt for Maddie - who vanished aged three from her family's Algarve holiday apartment in 2007. Now the Met Police are set to review all leads in the case, using technology and standards expected in a UK homicide or kidnap.

It will delight Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. A senior police source said: "They deserve reassurance that everything that can be done has been done."


in News of the World 09.05.2010

Interesting to see that as early as May 2010, Jim Gamble ASKS for an investigation from the Met and the article seem to imply he WANTED none other that Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton to lead it.

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.”

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007

MayMuse

Posts : 1678
Reputation : 1202
Join date : 2016-04-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Tony Bennett on 21.05.17 21:13

MayMuse wrote:
Top cop spearheads new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

By Lucy Panton, NoW Crime Editor

BRITAIN'S top murder cop has been lined up to spearhead a new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, we can reveal.

Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton, 49, who has been involved in some of the UK's biggest inquiries - including the murder of Milly Dowler and the terror reign of the Nightstalker sex beast - is seen as the best man to handle the challenging review.
Surely this article settles the issue beyond doubt.

Colin Sutton was Jim Gamble's chosen one.

For Gamble to have chosen Sutton means he knew Sutton well, and knew he was the right man for the job because Gamble knew he would do whatever he was told to.

And no doubt he would have done but for that 'phone call from one of Britain's top detectives telling him that the investigation was seriously flawed and would exonerate the McCanns before he even started.

He was paid by the media for a week or two in Portugal in 2007.

And in 2014.

And in 2017.

He only starts speaking about a flawed Met Police investigation after he is robustly challenged on CMOMM.

As for Gamble, he was side by side with the McCanns from Day One, meeting with Gerry McCann in London in May 2007, demanding people send him their holiday snaps, sending out his men to frustrate the Portuguese investigation.

That is if he didn't knock up a dummy Madeleine McCann page for the CEOP website on Monday 30 April - three days before the McCanns cried 'Abduction!'

____________________

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - Paul's first letter to his disciple Timothy,  1 Timothy 1 v 15

avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14700
Reputation : 2831
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Verdi on 21.05.17 23:18

Tony Bennett wrote:Surely this article settles the issue beyond doubt.

Colin Sutton was Jim Gamble's chosen one.
I posted the entire article at the beginning of this month - this is it..



Original Source: NEWS OF THE WORLD: SUNDAY 09 MAY 2010
By Lucy Panton, Crime Editor, 09/05/2010
 
Top cop spearheads new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
PROBE: Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton
BRITAIN'S top murder cop has been lined up to spearhead a new probe into the disappearance of
Madeleine McCann, we can reveal.

Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton, 49, who has been involved in some of the UK's biggest inquiries - including the murder of
Milly Dowler and the terror reign of the Nightstalker sex beast - is seen as the best man to handle the challenging review.

Senior child protection officer Jim Gamble has asked Scotland Yard to take a fresh look at the three-year investigation.

He blasted Portuguese cops for their handling of the hunt for Maddie - who vanished aged three from her family's Algarve holiday apartment in 2007. Now the Met Police are set to review all leads in the case, using technology and standards expected in a UK homicide or kidnap.

It will delight Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. A senior police source said: "They deserve reassurance that everything that can be done has been done."
[Acknowledgement - pamalam]

Textusa?  No comment!

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6403
Reputation : 3503
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re;Colin Sutton,comments Operation Grange Remit?

Post by willowthewisp on 22.05.17 16:03

So yet Once again"Big Jim Gamble" and Cronies(Brunt,Sutton)(Brunt,Gamble Brenda Leyland) smearing finger prints associated for the past seven Years-Operation Grange,Remit,Theresa May,David Cameron,Rebekah Brooks?
Do not for get where Big Jim was a Time Served Irish Policeman,know anything about Kincora Boys Care Home,eh,Big Jim,did you lend any books to any associates for their perusal in 2007!?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1937
Reputation : 772
Join date : 2015-05-07

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 22.05.17 18:14

There are a lot of people applauding Colin Sutton for his bravery in talking to the media and dropping in what is in fact hearsay and according to Colin Sutton will never be substantiated or revealed. Of course it wouldn't be hearsay if Colin Sutton were to blow a whistle and reveal the name of the senior police officer who allegedly called him to warn him off the Operation Grange gig and it's strange to me that whistle blowing extends itself into retirement.

For now, it's all fluff but fluff is the essence of every agency surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

I sincerely hope Colin Sutton enjoys his retirement and new found media career but most of all I hope with all my heart that the fluff goes away and someone has the guts to tell the truth and blow a whistle, especially those retired senior police officers who supposedly investigated crime without fear or favour. That includes you Jim Gamble.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Verdi on 22.05.17 21:48

Lest they forget..

Colin Sutton Investigations

Since retirement I have conducted investigations for large companies, public bodies and private individuals.
I have also worked for BBC TV and Radio, Sky News and ITV News, commenting on high-profile crimes such as Madeleine McCann, Tia Sharp, April Jones, Steven Lawrence and Millie Dowler, as well as strategic issues such as police reform and the criminal law.  In print, I have written for The Times, The Sun and the Daily Mail, dealing with live cases as well as subjects as diverse as the Kennedy assassination, the case for a universal DNA database and reforms to the probation service.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6403
Reputation : 3503
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Google.Gaspar.Statements on 18.07.17 8:46

Alan Vinnicombe posted this in Abduction of Scam.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/253706621672502/permalink/466633040379858/
2 hrs
Wolf in sheep's clothing Colin Sutton


Aesop's Fables(620–560 BC) yes that's how long this warning has been going... to be careful... lets tell the story then explain that in the mystery of MBM nothing is what it seems, it's so big that the cleverest and indeed most dark and devious brains in the country are at work. We only see the clock face but not the working of this most complicated of clocks. The fable goes like this .......
''Once upon a time, a Wolf [1] resolved to disguise his appearance in order to secure food more easily. Encased in the skin of a sheep,[2] he pastured with the flock deceiving the shepherd by his costume. In the evening he was shut up by the shepherd in the fold;

The gate was closed, and the entrance made thoroughly secure. But the shepherd,[3] returning to the fold during the night to obtain meat for the next day, mistakenly caught up the Wolf instead of a sheep and killed him instantly.
A cautionary tale from the mists of time itself, what if I told you the characters in the story were ......

[1] The McCanns
[2] Operation Grange
[3] Colin Sutton

Changes things, yes these fables were warnings, in this case, do not try to be too clever and deceive people or you might end up destroying yourselves! You see the McCann's are hiding behind Grange, praising them thanking them well they must, it's their cloak of innocents if Grange think us innocent than we are, very safe in there, and so they were the ten years of establishment support makes it so, until one day the shepherd, Colin Sutton, destroys the facade, the wolves that think they are clever and oh so devious are destroyed in a heartbeat, all over when Sutton out the blue opened the entrance the wolves thought so thoroughly secure and took them out !

Let Sutton explain. how it was done ......

Sutton tipped to head up the Madeleine McCann probe was warned he would be ordered to prove she was abducted and ignore other leads.

The source warned that he would be tasked with proving her parents Kate and Gerry were innocent and ignoring any alternatives to the abduction theory.

Speaking to Martin Brunt on Sky News, he said:
'I did receive a call from a very senior met police officer who knew me and said ''it wouldn’t be a good idea for me to head investigation on the basis that I wouldn’t be happy conducting an investigation being told where I could go and where I couldn’t go, the things I could investigate and the things I couldn’t. '

The Scotland Yard investigation was going to be very narrowly focused and that focus would be away from any suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of the McCanns or the tapas friends.' watch in on this u tube entry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RF7fR0J5HOw

Things are not always what they seem!

Wow no one saw that coming, the public thought Grange were investigating team McCann and one day would swoop arrest them, or at least question them, after all 12 million pounds spent and the dogs they must be interviewed... it seems not we are told, not by hearsay, not a theory of an online blogger, not a C list celeb... NO, a creditable establishment figure who cannot be doubted, there it is set in stone. Grange has no remit to investigate the McCann's, the untouchable are just that... or they were.. until Sutton let the cat out of the bag, BOOM, it's a scam tax payers money wasted!

Encapsulated right there Colin Sutton drops, Redwood, Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley Nicola Wall, puts them all at risk, now why would he do that?

More importantly, why was he allowed to do that, make no mistake this doesn't make MSM sky TV without getting government approval, no no not in the nation's interest to tell the public all these headlines, all that money wasted imagine the emails to all MPs from an irate public, no make no mistake this was orchestrated start of a campaign to expose the McCann's for what the are!

This is a man who's colleagues who have climbed the greasy ladder to the top of the Met as Sutton himself has done, he's friends with them, they don't get to the top by talking out of school, spilling the beans on each other!

This is where I expose the machinations of the elite of our society Colin Sutton IMO was put up to it merely a messenger sent by the powers that be to start the fall of the empire of team McCann,

My contacts tell me he wouldn't possibly do this alone unless if he was told too, paid too, promised a job on Sky, this is how these things work it's called risk and reward ,assured his fellow top cops are safe from disaster, from what I know Sutton is far from him being a brave whistle blower he just part of the plan to ditch team McCann in the near future!

How can this work well he's told us the Met is not investigating the McCanns, a terrible revelation for McCann's it was their umbrella of cover, the premise the Met think them innocent they must be! not if they are not to be looked at, boom game changer!

Now, what has this as done to the case, think outside the box please, the impact is he's destroyed the McCann in a minute!

But saves Mets top cops, if they didn't investigate the team McCanns they can't be blamed for not noticing what a 5-year-old could see... the lies and the dogs and the ridiculous timeline, a get out of jail card, done before it happens the preparation done by Sutton! he has saved his mates at the Met they are home free, well played Mr Sutton, the non-whistle blower but destroyer of team McCann in the skilful positioning of the Establishment dumping of the Tapas 9 very soon! they have been out thought and mesmerised!

Of course, others have to be warned to desert a sinking ship, some are rats did you know that the dispatched Clarence Mitchell is set to become the head of media monitoring for the Conservative Party campaign unit, and was also a spokesman for Madeleine McCann's parents.
[note the was!]
Mr Mitchell will report to Andy Coulson, the Tories' director of communications, he will not be an active spokesperson for the political party.The two men reportedly have a close relationship, following Mr Coulson's stint as editor of the News of the World.
The funds' accountants has resigned and a whole raft of believers in MSM have fallen silent, worse of the Sun their biggest supporters banner headline last week

''Pals of the parents have said Goncalo Amaral 'has won once and for all'

they have never had the public's support if the lose MSM's blind faith the ship will sink faster than the Titanic
If I take you back to Aesop's time he would say
''The end is Nigh''

I have that from the top, Colin Sutton Ex-Senior Investigating Officer for the Met Police Murder Squad no less, he said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him!

I think I've explained the real reason why.TOMORROW I tell who is behind bringing them down and why !


https://www.facebook.com/groups/253706621672502/permalink/466633040379858/
avatar
Google.Gaspar.Statements

Posts : 365
Reputation : 236
Join date : 2013-05-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 18.07.17 9:20

Snipped from the above post

"I have that from the top, Colin Sutton Ex-Senior Investigating Officer for the Met Police Murder Squad no less, he said a high-ranking friend in the Met called him!

I think I've explained the real reason why.TOMORROW I tell who is behind bringing them down and why !"


The only thing I can think of in response to this obvious rubbish is the famous words of Batman who promises next week something will happen, a bit like Sonia Poulton promised an explosive revealing documentary.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alQ0zUjLLmg
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by hogwash on 18.07.17 9:38

Why is it rubbish?
avatar
hogwash

Posts : 209
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2015-09-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 18.07.17 9:41

hogwash wrote:Why is it rubbish?
Because it is.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by polyenne on 18.07.17 9:42

The "top" is not an ex-senior investigating officer. The top is now Cressida Dick. And she won't blab !

It's like the pub sign "Free Beer Tomorrow"
avatar
polyenne

Posts : 349
Reputation : 229
Join date : 2017-03-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by hogwash on 18.07.17 10:20

aquila wrote:
hogwash wrote:Why is it rubbish?
Because it is.
Thank you for your help.
avatar
hogwash

Posts : 209
Reputation : 192
Join date : 2015-09-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 18.07.17 11:00

hogwash wrote:
aquila wrote:
hogwash wrote:Why is it rubbish?
Because it is.
Thank you for your help.
Happy to assist.

See polyenne's post for clarity.
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Phoebe on 18.07.17 11:06

IMO this piece from "Abduction of scam" is wishful thinking. Is the U.K establishment actively setting itself up for ridicule? Most unlikely. To admit that the McCanns might have had any direct role in their daughter's disappearance immediately points the finger of blame at those who interfered politically (as Dr. Amaral has claimed) in scuppering the Portuguese investigation in 2007 which had made them the prime suspects. Subsequent governments of all hues failed to condemn this interference. They are all in the same boat and will do nothing to rock it. However Op.Grange fizzles out it will not burn any political/establishment figures.
avatar
Phoebe

Posts : 513
Reputation : 579
Join date : 2017-03-01

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Verdi on 18.07.17 12:00

Aesop's fable?  More like a Brothers Grimm fairytale.

Once upon a time......



......  The End

The style of this short but sweet ripping yarn has an air of familiarity.  Tell me whoever you are today - Colin Sutton (ex of the Yard) made this radical unverified claim two and a half months ago, when he said he received the information from the unnamed caller back in 2010 - so where are we now?

Only this weekend, the UK media reported that Operation Grange are surging ahead, looking at leads (dogs?) old and new.  How does this fit in with your elaborate fable Mr/s Anon?

Social media can be very destructive in the wrong hands.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 6403
Reputation : 3503
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 19.07.17 18:10

Here's Part Two of Alan's post.

A bit longer than the last one, but food for thought, as it follows our own thinking about what the Sun have been doing more recently - letting Tracey's stupid articles sit with Comments open and not moderated . . . 

Doesn't take us much further into the Grange thing though.


Alan Vinnicombe
9 hrs

Public opinion brings down the McCanns

The media is called the unofficial branch of government for a reason, Winston Churchill took the view that there was "No such thing as public opinion. There is only published opinion". While Abraham Lincoln's take was simply: "Public opinion is everything''

At one end the post-war generation who are used to believing what they read and at the other, a younger generation, who broadly take a more "individualist" view of the world indeed think for themselves. so we have underlying changes in public opinion across generations, image the government calling all the nations young to go a and die in a world war today won't happen couldn't work, we would point blank refuse to go and serve Queen and country Volunteer yes if that's what you want, its a fact we don't just swallow the pills the press feed us anymore,

This has had a profound impact within reach of Whitehall's civil servants and ministers is a vast array of researchers watching us and publications.

There's no doubt a program intent on buying the influence of all major media outlets by recruiting and paying news organisations and journalists by means of propaganda.

Famous five run the MSM

On the one hand, just five individual Billionaires in Britain get to control 80% what you read in printed media and on the other hand, just five Internet Service Providers get to control what 87% of people get to see on their devices.

Both are heavily influenced by government. It is no wonder what the public think there is a misinterpretation of the truth. the harsh reality is that the 5 billionaires who run our media, have huge power in our democracy forcing our political parties to prioritise their wishes over the wishes of the British public. These 5 people not only own 80% of the newspapers they also own TV stations, press agencies, book companies, cinemas, so everything we think or speak about in Britain is nearly controlled entirely by tiny group they are
Rupert Murdoch, Jonathon Harmsworth, Richard Desmond and Barclay’s Twins. None of these people live in Britain.

They control what you read and see, they want you to believe a manufactured story to keep them where they are and keep you where you are.they are the puppet masters king makers they put theses people in as PMs and crushed them all when finished with none were able or allowed to ever say anything in the MSM after their downfall ,the above elite are there all the time of course led by one Rupert Murdoch!

1979-90 Margaret Thatcher Conservative
1990-97 John Major Conservative
1997-2007 Tony Blair Labour
2007-2010 Gordon Brown Labour
2010 – 2016 David Cameron Con / Lib coalition

Note the silence from them after they lose nothing to report no one to whistle blow on? nothing the saw all those years, oh they better not, similar to the silence from everyone who has ever worked on the Maddie investigation, nothing gets out think about that, why?
So it's plain to see the powerful men, in reality, are the billionaires who oversee
the general election, the parties spend millions adverting in the MSM you need the owners onside you certainly won't win an election without them, so you invite them to Downing street listen to their ideas,

LIKE THEY ARE YOUR BOSS ITS BEST TO KEEP THEM HAPPY after all they have the power to get you sacked!

Heres some proof that shown the policial parties you better do what we say or else.....................
The Sun tells its readers to vote Labour, switching sides after more than 20 years of unswerving support for the Tory party.

In a front page article headlined 'The Sun Backs Blair', the paper, which has a daily readership of more than 10 million, says Tony Blair should be the next prime minister.Sun readers were important to Mr Major in 1992, comprising more than a fifth of the electorate and more than a third of the don't know.

The paper's change of allegiance is made more striking by the fact that owner Rupert Murdoch has always taken a direct part in the decision-making at every election.

The Sun became an enthusiastic supporter of the Conservatives when Margaret Thatcher was elected leader in 1975. Attracted by her anti-union stance, THE MSM needed to sack so many with tech advances cutting the need for many jobs the all powerful unions fought this, RM needed them smashed Mrs T was the one chosen to do it, then threw its weight behind her three successive election victories.

So you see Mr Murdoch and the other 4 can write what they like and instructed staff to report with a certain slant if they want to destroy a celebrity or politician they do.

Do you think these guys even know whats being written listen to one of the big 5

Richard Desmond.......
he just bought the Express when was the columnist Stephen Pollard, who left his feelings encoded within his final leader column. The first letter of each sentence spelt out: “F?**K YOU DESMOND”. It was Rupert Murdoch who alerted the paper’s new proprietor to the insult. “He called me at about five in the morning. He was furious about it. I didn’t even know what a leader column was then.

Well RM telling his friend about a sly move in what was not even his paper! oh he knows whats being said about the McCann's he knows how many front pages he knows the terrible demonising of GA he could stop it just like that, a million comments from us means less than nothing, one phone call from RM will change the case, if he wants that for 9 years he doesn't want that,
The first few months the reporting was balanced and all times totally against the McCann's, leading to being sued no less, gulp would you risk poking the Lion, that they did and were not destroyed far from it, saying so much!

They are lorded over the Sun have their own reporter on the Suns staff writing endless support pieces, their spokesperson can have front pages when ever he likes, to print non-stories and anti GA and PJ propaganda and spin to minimise things likes the dogs, the big question is why are they doing this , has a deal been struck with the government, does the Home Office want support for the McCann's in exchange for something the big 5 want.

Is it so simple that the McCann's are mere pawns in a giant power game, overtly all this isn't about a missing child , I believe it's about freedom of the press, which has always been the fight between the two fractions the owners vs the politics the horse trading that's gone on over the years the big 5 have the
MSM POWER TO CONTROL HOW THE PUBLIC THINK and the government have the power to control the press, so an uneasy alliance is in place, I'm sure by the weight of support thrown at the McCann team from day one that the government think it's in national interests to support the McCanns, what are they giving the big 5 too also back team McCann's ?

Let me show you how the battle is waged with little regard for justice to Maddie from either side!

What if I told you Mr Murdoch set up Operation Grange
By now you will have worked out these big 5 are the ones protecting the McCann's along side the establishment for so long that the government faces have changed but the abduction is still 100 % pushed relentlessly, so much so that the MSM king set up the cover better known as Operation Grange this is how explain how,,,,,,,,,,,,

Through Rebekah Brooks who ran Rupert Murdoch’s entire British newspaper empire a. almost a member of the Murdoch family, close to Prime Ministers Blair, Brown, and Cameron, they attended Brooks amazing wedding along with Rupert Murdoch [oh dear] who had flown with wait for it daughter Elisabeth Murdoch married at the time to public relations man Matthew Freud, the son of former MP Sir Clement Freud !

From this perspective, the power BROOKS wielded Cameron agreed to launch Grange the review began in May 2011 following a request to Scotland Yard from Home Secretary Theresa May,
The issue of whether this request was the result of "persuasion" from Rebekah Brooks was one of the issues raised at the Leveson Inquiry. good chance it was?

Brooks left the stage because the phone-hacking scandal took her down.

Now the same people who lined up behind the McCann's gave us GRANGE are the same ones with SUTTONS help have discredited a Home Office paid for investigation ordered by Murdoch we have to ask way? dropping the Met in the brown stuff pouring suspicion on the untouchables on the Tapas 9 how are they feeling watching that, heart stopping I should think! untouchable not anymore!I think they are preparing the exposure of the Tapas 9 all of them, things are reported in a way in the years before would be spun as a non-story and how dare they keystones third world cops are drunk again!

So the McCann's are still suspected say Murdoch now and not only that his Grange is bull a sham a waste of tax payers money has dropped them all in it the people he was so carefully protecting why is the important thing
Now I've explained how thing are today in the UK MSM, imagine how perplexed they are that for all the power, the 10 years of the front page SCREAMING McCanns are innocent, poor parents no proof of any evidence against them, while at the same time pillaring Portugal, the lie of turning the entire Portuguese police force into just one man promoted as the slug working alone the Portuguese nutter waging war against them with HIS crazy theories! when in fact it was the opinion of many including the UK police there on the spot by September!

WE THE British public are having none of it! Much scratching of powerful brows ''But BOSS we have told the sheep the McCanns are saints'', why are the not believing us?

I will tell you behind the time's Newspaper dinosaurs it's because of us little people on the internet more people use the net today they have turned to us for the truth!

And that's the reason they are about to dump the doctors, they only back winners and the McCanns have become frankly embarrassing!

Leaving trolls comments on their pro-McCann storylines tells me they have at last woken up its not trolls it's public opinion even CM given up he can't spin 95% non-believers into a few trolls! the plethora of lies have caught up with them, the new internet age sheep are not that stupid nowdays, they forgot to do the research that I did above!

Pointless BLAND REPORTING
Over recent years restricting press freedom in the name of national security has been a focal point for the government.

The UK’s lack of constitutional guarantees for freedom of expression locked down by leading them all to be under the elite! all news or current affairs publisher must be registered as such with a government regulatory body. goes without saying it’s a reversal of hundreds of years of liberty where we’ve been allowed to say or print whatever we want to subject only to the laws of libel,
Have you noticed how nothing is exposed anymore, no one is investigating anything, outrages are only exposed when the powers want them to be, given up to the wolves, usually after they have died?

Anyone publishing any form of news anywhere in the world, who allows UK based people to read it, will need to either submit to the UK regulators or leave themselves at risk, I cannot emphasise enough how established this already is in law, the definition of the jurisdiction of publication is not where it was published, but where it was read.

As an example, The New York Times has readers of its online edition in the UK. It's certainly a news organisation under the meaning of the bill: and because those readers in the UK read through their browsers then the NYT is deemed to be published in the UK. The NYT must, therefore, register with the regulator and agree to be bound by it.

How BIG is that UK has now got power over the world's press, No wonder GA book is still not been printed in English it will have to be put to the UK regulators and we know what they will do don't we?

THIS stops Amazon printing the truth of the lie in English as if it is read here is the same as publishing it here, lightbulb moment now you know why we can't buy an English version anywhere it's because our government have covered the whole damn world.

I think Maddie is in the middle of a battlefield between Murdoch and his friends and the government, this is the reason GA saying this case with be solved when the politics are right, I believe that day is dawning soon, RM is about to change sides like he did with Bliar making him PM after being staunch tory for 20 years, I'm sure Thatcher never thought he would change sides, remember a fifth of the electorate and more than a third of the don't know are Sun readers, the sudden silence from team McCann and sea change in the MSM have they realised ''The Sun is for turning ?

DO THEY HAVE controlling influence over the British electorate, of course, they still do, when the McCanns ship sinks it will be "The Sun wot done it "

After all public opinion is everything without it sells will fall ''can't have that, can we?
SAID THE BOSS WITH A FROWN.



https://www.facebook.com/groups/253706621672502/permalink/467235446986284/
avatar
Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 10158
Reputation : 5118
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by polyenne on 19.07.17 19:25

Thank goodness for punctuation
avatar
polyenne

Posts : 349
Reputation : 229
Join date : 2017-03-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by JRP on 20.07.17 9:50

"At one end the post-war generation who are used to believing what they read and at the other, a younger generation, who broadly take a more "individualist" view of the world indeed think for themselves. so we have underlying changes in public opinion across generations, image the government calling all the nations young to go a and die in a world war today won't happen couldn't work, we would point blank refuse to go and serve Queen and country Volunteer yes if that's what you want, its a fact we don't just swallow the pills the press feed us anymore," 


I would describe this as a laborious rant.

The suggestion that those who fought and died in either of the World Wars were in any way less intelligent than you Vinnie, must be taken with a huge bucket of salt.
People were not called up to die, they were called up to fight for this country.

Of course, the younger generation can no longer be so naive as to go to war, unless of course, somebody like Tony Blair or George Bush invents a reason, and thousands of young soldiers are there like a shot.

So Vinnie, nothing changes, you're young generation is just as gullible as the past inhabitants.

Oh, and by the way.
Do you really think that Rupert Murdoch suddenly woke up one morning and decided he would support Labour?
Or is it more likely that he realised  the Conservatives had ran their course, John Major wasn't going to win. Tony Blair re-invented Labour into a centrist party, more akin to Tory ideals than the Labour left.

Murdoch didn't change colour, Labour did.

But hey! Who am I to lecture a smart kid... huh!

JRP

Posts : 526
Reputation : 465
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 20.07.17 9:57

JRP wrote:"At one end the post-war generation who are used to believing what they read and at the other, a younger generation, who broadly take a more "individualist" view of the world indeed think for themselves. so we have underlying changes in public opinion across generations, image the government calling all the nations young to go a and die in a world war today won't happen couldn't work, we would point blank refuse to go and serve Queen and country Volunteer yes if that's what you want, its a fact we don't just swallow the pills the press feed us anymore," 


I would describe this as a laborious rant.

The suggestion that those who fought and died in either of the World Wars were in any way less intelligent than you Vinnie, must be taken with a huge bucket of salt.
People were not called up to die, they were called up to fight for this country.

Of course, the younger generation can no longer be so naive as to go to war, unless of course, somebody like Tony Blair or George Bush invents a reason, and thousands of young soldiers are there like a shot.

So Vinnie, nothing changes, you're young generation is just as gullible as the past inhabitants.

Oh, and by the way.
Do you really think that Rupert Murdoch suddenly woke up one morning and decided he would support Labour?
Or is it more likely that he realised  the Conservatives had ran their course, John Major wasn't going to win. Tony Blair re-invented Labour into a centrist party, more akin to Tory ideals than the Labour left.

Murdoch didn't change colour, Labour did.

But hey! Who am I to lecture a smart kid... huh!
@JRP, I think you are very generous to waste your time indulging obvious rubbish that belongs on a blog not too far away to recognise which is occupied by verbose narcissists. Oh Lord, that'll rattle a few cages today and no doubt  keep things bubbling in the libertarian cauldron. big grin
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by JRP on 20.07.17 10:07

Thank you @aquila, happy to help.
I think we should have a whip-round for some commas and full stops, as an aid to easy reading. specs

JRP

Posts : 526
Reputation : 465
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Re: Colin Sutton: Met only interested in proving McCann parents innocent

Post by aquila on 20.07.17 10:19

JRP wrote:Thank you @aquila, happy to help.
I think we should have a whip-round for some commas and full stops, as an aid to easy reading. specs
I only guess where commas go but I did work in advertising and there was no need to understand such complexities. I'd hate to become commaphobic. big grin
avatar
aquila

Posts : 8594
Reputation : 1639
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 10 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum