Re: Alternative Theorizing

by Verdi 30.06.19 22:03

Sorry to say pbslady, your post is utter nonsense on every level.

If your intention is amusement then again I'm sorry - it's not funny.

I've moved your post here for obvious reasons.

Please be mindful about what you post on CMOMM, the forum is constantly monitored by the McCanns and their legal representatives. It's not helpful to make seemingly accusatory statements.

I trust you understand.

by sammi1967 22.07.19 13:29

I have followed this story on and off since it occurred in 2007-so far nothing has convinced me that Maddie ever existed- I appears to be a complete hoax- what the original agenda was I have no idea but surely if it wS I tended to be covered up all media publications about it would have been stopped- yet 12 years on it is still ongoing with no more sense being able to be made of it Than there was in the first year

by Verdi 22.07.19 13:30

Oh dear ....

by Verdi 22.07.19 14:11

What's this..

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

Scotch mist?

by crispbee2000 26.09.19 23:41

Here's throwing some mud at the wall to see what might stick...…...

As we know, there's little in the abduction scenario to implicate Mark Warner (MW) as being negligent or in any way blame-worthy. Indeed if the McCanns had used the Night Creche service the "abduction" wouldn't have happened. Madeline was not in the care of MW at the time of her disappearance. Thus we all wonder at the size and speed of the response by MW to the disappearance of Madeline. So, I pondered along the lines of:

What if someone at MW at the local level of management was using vacant apartments to host swinging parties. It would need the further collusion of cleaners at least and money would have to pass hands (presumably cash). I could imagine swinger groups being told by word of mouth that by using certain key words or phrases when booking with MW in Praia DL one can gain access to an additional apartment(s) at certain times and that it can all be "arranged" once you get to the resort. David Payne was certainly very particular about the layout of rooms for his group of holidaying friends. This could be done without the top brass being aware. If the facts around Madeline's disappearance were linked to this covert activity could it have forced the local people to confess about what had been going on and thus MW had to jump in quick to try and save their corporate reputation from something that could have been commercially devastating? Bell Potinger may have been instructed to cover the trail of what happened. Indeed, if such an apartment (or apartments) existed, one of them may have become a temporary hiding place, though that seems like a very high risk strategy......

As an aside I once checked into a London hotel very very late when working away only to find a couple in my room "at it". I was promptly given another room. The following day several work colleagues in the office said that there were many cases of hotel staff sub-letting no-show rooms out to local pimps for cash. That's partly why I wondered about the possibility of swinging facilities being made available under the cover of respectability without the corporates blessing.

Just a thought.

by Verdi 27.09.19 0:03

Oh please

not the 'Textusa' theory again!

Go back from whence you came and check-out all the other bizarre theories documented over the years.

I guess it could be said that Textusa has to hit on a good note at least once - unfortunately I think it beyond the realms of possibilty.

I trust your reasons for being a member of CMOMM are honourable crispbee2000. From where I'm standing it's looking a bit doubtful.

by crispbee2000 29.09.19 10:44

What's the point of offering people the chance to debate theories if one of the moderators slams you down and doubts your integrity? I do not follow textusa and so if this is tired old ground that has been previously proven to be a non-starter - then I apologise. That is if you,Verdi, can get off your high horse and stop slamming people down. It's not the first time that you've done it Verdi, is it? You say that my idea (which I stated was mere speculation - put out there to see if it chimes with information that others have gained) is "beyond the realms of possibility" but you make no real points that disprove it. Perhaps you can tell us why you believe the corps and agencies responded so quickly and robustly?

by ROSA 29.09.19 12:18

Nothing surprises me about that group of people I think they were all into each other and their kids , a very special group of disgusting people the gasper statements come to mind.

by **Jill Havern** 29.09.19 13:27

Didn't Kate McCann say something like "We were all in to each other"?

by Verdi 29.09.19 13:42

crispbee2000 wrote:What's the point of offering people the chance to debate theories if one of the moderators slams you down and doubts your integrity? I do not follow textusa and so if this is tired old ground that has been previously proven to be a non-starter - then I apologise. That is if you,Verdi, can get off your high horse and stop slamming people down. It's not the first time that you've done it Verdi, is it? You say that my idea (which I stated was mere speculation - put out there to see if it chimes with information that others have gained) is "beyond the realms of possibility" but you make no real points that disprove it. Perhaps you can tell us why you believe the corps and agencies responded so quickly and robustly?

With respect cripsbee2000, CMOMM is a serious forum that's been beavering away for nine years, probing every aspect of a crime committed now in excess of twelve years ago. Any number of theories have been presented over the years, from the sublime to the ridiculous - Textusa theory of swingers is just one.

To save time and energy expanding on a topic that has been long since debunked, suffice to say there is no evidence to suggest Madeleine McCann's disappearance was in any way connected to a covert swingers club. The theory defies logic.

Take your mind back to the very beginning and the evidence available, pick it apart until left with only the vitals - that's what CMOMM has been doing over the years.

Here on CMOMM we really do try to stick to evidence when purporting any hypothesis. Please don't take offence by my brusque attitude, this case is enough to try the patience of a saint - and I ain't no saint.

ETA: There is only one moderator here on CMOMM - and that be me that it be

by Verdi 29.09.19 14:07

I believe too much emphasis has been placed on Bell Pottinger's initial involvement. I refer you to a brief article published in the PRweek on 9th May 2007, it's an important clue as to how Mark Warner public relations representatives operate..

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

Evidence suggests, Mark Warner initially engaged their existing PR representatives Resonate Consumer public relations (established in 2003, correct me if I'm wrong), a Bell Pottinger subsidiary. Bell Pottinger was a very large PR corporation with tentacles stretching far and wide, as Mark Warner was, probably still is, a very large tour company stretching far and wide with a reputation to manage.

Just think of the potential damage to their reputation - a three year old child snatched from it's bed, possibly by a dangerous paedophile!?! It's no wonder they jumped!

Mark Warner did what I would expect them to do .... protect their reputation and pamper the so called victims.

by AlexBG 04.10.19 16:51

crispbee2000 wrote:What's the point of offering people the chance to debate theories if one of the moderators slams you down and doubts your integrity? I do not follow textusa and so if this is tired old ground that has been previously proven to be a non-starter - then I apologise. That is if you,Verdi, can get off your high horse and stop slamming people down. It's not the first time that you've done it Verdi, is it? You say that my idea (which I stated was mere speculation - put out there to see if it chimes with information that others have gained) is "beyond the realms of possibility" but you make no real points that disprove it.

Agree with the above - I posted some 'alternative evidence' a while back, which offered a potential new line of investigation, only to have it ridiculed, with the content being moved and tucked away before anyone could see it!
But this IS a conspiracy theory forum. So why not allow discussion of all theories? If they're a load of rubbish, forum members will judge them accordingly, and they will fall into obscurity without the need for official ridicule and censorship. Likewise, if a theory has been discussed before, it shouldn't preclude further discussion in a new thread, with the opportunity for new members to share their insights.

by AlexBG 04.10.19 17:05

Verdi wrote:Mark Warner was, probably still is, a very large tour company stretching far and wide with a reputation to manage.

It was? I'd never heard of them before 2007, and I've not come across them when searching for holiday deals in the years since.

by Verdi 04.10.19 22:11

Hello again AlexBG - so nice to see your back!

I must say you had me confounded for a moment but a cursory look back reminds me, your particular interest was I believe 'Reverse Speech' - don't know why I've capitalized it but never mind.

The thread was merged with 'Unorthodox Theorizing' because that's precisely what the subject is. At the time, the beginning of 2019 I believe, you were given a full explanation as to why your comments on the subject of reverse speech were merged with an existing ongoing thread. The theory was well thrashed out, not for the first time as you were told at the time, it came to a standstill only because members were generally opposed to the theory - not because of any forum censorship or fixed agenda. Still, I'm quite sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

Having said that, I'm pleased you've brought this thread back to life, it's reminded me of my intention to merge it with 'Unorthodox Theorizing' which I will do immediately.

I'm sorry the forum administration is not up to your expected standard but you are still here and posting so all is not lost. thumbsup

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

by AlexBG 04.10.19 22:42

Verdi wrote:I'm sorry the forum administration is not up to your expected standard but you are still here and posting so all is not lost.

I still visit occasionally, but lots don't. Hostility toward both newcomers and what you call "unorthodox theorising" (has an official orthodoxy been published?) puts people off.
Try not to turn into Xenophobe [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] of Flame Warriors fame, is my advice.

by **sharonl** 04.10.19 22:50

Unorthodox this may well be but you have to admit that there are a lot of pointers in this direction.

The statements from Kate's old Uni mates, referring to her as Hot Lips Healy, a party animal.

Allegations of the group being swingers

Kate answering the door to David Payne in just a towel

The contents of the Gaspar Statements

The McCanns friendship with Clement Freud

Pole dancing nannies

The suggestive photos of Madeleine

The people who support them. Phillip Green, Nigel Nessling & many others who have been caught out.

Others running Social media sites in their favour who turned out to be porn actresses of ladies of the night.

Then we have the likes of Blair who was alleged to have been covering up a paedophile ring

Not forgetting a website that was found, naming two of their top supporters involved in gay cruising at Heathrow airport.

Thats just for starters

We are not going to prove this but i can see why its been brought up and IMO there are far too many pointers to safely say that these swinging parties did not occur

by Verdi 05.10.19 0:22

Swinging used to be called wife swapping.

by crispbee2000 08.10.19 23:09

Verdi wrote:
crispbee2000 wrote:What's the point of offering people the chance to debate theories if one of the moderators slams you down and doubts your integrity? I do not follow textusa and so if this is tired old ground that has been previously proven to be a non-starter - then I apologise. That is if you,Verdi, can get off your high horse and stop slamming people down. It's not the first time that you've done it Verdi, is it? You say that my idea (which I stated was mere speculation - put out there to see if it chimes with information that others have gained) is "beyond the realms of possibility" but you make no real points that disprove it. Perhaps you can tell us why you believe the corps and agencies responded so quickly and robustly?

With respect cripsbee2000, CMOMM is a serious forum that's been beavering away for nine years, probing every aspect of a crime committed now in excess of twelve years ago. Any number of theories have been presented over the years, from the sublime to the ridiculous - Textusa theory of swingers is just one.

To save time and energy expanding on a topic that has been long since debunked, suffice to say there is no evidence to suggest Madeleine McCann's disappearance was in any way connected to a covert swingers club. The theory defies logic.

Take your mind back to the very beginning and the evidence available, pick it apart until left with only the vitals - that's what CMOMM has been doing over the years.

Here on CMOMM we really do try to stick to evidence when purporting any hypothesis. Please don't take offence by my brusque attitude, this case is enough to try the patience of a saint - and I ain't no saint.

ETA: There is only one moderator here on CMOMM - and that be me that it be

OK, I take no offence. I share your frustration. Believe me I am spending plenty of time looking at available evidence and "the vitals" but that leaves us all short of motive and means. You are probably right that wife-swapping (or other) has no DIRECT connection, but there's sure something that binds the T9 and makes them pervert the course of justice. Again, sorry to dig over old ground, but without mal intent.

by Liz Eagles 08.10.19 23:19

crispbee2000 wrote:
Verdi wrote:
crispbee2000 wrote:What's the point of offering people the chance to debate theories if one of the moderators slams you down and doubts your integrity? I do not follow textusa and so if this is tired old ground that has been previously proven to be a non-starter - then I apologise. That is if you,Verdi, can get off your high horse and stop slamming people down. It's not the first time that you've done it Verdi, is it? You say that my idea (which I stated was mere speculation - put out there to see if it chimes with information that others have gained) is "beyond the realms of possibility" but you make no real points that disprove it. Perhaps you can tell us why you believe the corps and agencies responded so quickly and robustly?

With respect cripsbee2000, CMOMM is a serious forum that's been beavering away for nine years, probing every aspect of a crime committed now in excess of twelve years ago. Any number of theories have been presented over the years, from the sublime to the ridiculous - Textusa theory of swingers is just one.

To save time and energy expanding on a topic that has been long since debunked, suffice to say there is no evidence to suggest Madeleine McCann's disappearance was in any way connected to a covert swingers club. The theory defies logic.

Take your mind back to the very beginning and the evidence available, pick it apart until left with only the vitals - that's what CMOMM has been doing over the years.

Here on CMOMM we really do try to stick to evidence when purporting any hypothesis. Please don't take offence by my brusque attitude, this case is enough to try the patience of a saint - and I ain't no saint.

ETA: There is only one moderator here on CMOMM - and that be me that it be
OK, I take no offence. I share your frustration. Believe me I am spending plenty of time looking at available evidence and "the vitals" but that leaves us all short of motive and means. You are probably right that wife-swapping (or other) has no DIRECT connection, but there's sure something that binds the T9 and makes them pervert the course of justice. Again, sorry to dig over old ground, but without mal intent.

Read more and spout less about Textusa bringing conspiracy onto the forum.

by Lance De Boils 30.06.20 17:04

To throw a weird one into the mix (or a couple of,) Say G&K were having an almighty domestic and one threw something at the other? Eg a wine bottle, A can of beans? It missed the intended target but clobbered a wee girl hiding behind the sofa?

by cookiemuncher 30.06.20 17:45

crispbee2000 wrote:Here's throwing some mud at the wall to see what might stick...…...

As we know, there's little in the abduction scenario to implicate Mark Warner (MW) as being negligent or in any way blame-worthy. Indeed if the McCanns had used the Night Creche service the "abduction" wouldn't have happened. Madeline was not in the care of MW at the time of her disappearance. Thus we all wonder at the size and speed of the response by MW to the disappearance of Madeline. So, I pondered along the lines of:

What if someone at MW at the local level of management was using vacant apartments to host swinging parties. It would need the further collusion of cleaners at least and money would have to pass hands (presumably cash). I could imagine swinger groups being told by word of mouth that by using certain key words or phrases when booking with MW in Praia DL one can gain access to an additional apartment(s) at certain times and that it can all be "arranged" once you get to the resort. David Payne was certainly very particular about the layout of rooms for his group of holidaying friends. This could be done without the top brass being aware. If the facts around Madeline's disappearance were linked to this covert activity could it have forced the local people to confess about what had been going on and thus MW had to jump in quick to try and save their corporate reputation from something that could have been commercially devastating? Bell Potinger may have been instructed to cover the trail of what happened. Indeed, if such an apartment (or apartments) existed, one of them may have become a temporary hiding place, though that seems like a very high risk strategy......

As an aside I once checked into a London hotel very very late when working away only to find a couple in my room "at it". I was promptly given another room. The following day several work colleagues in the office said that there were many cases of hotel staff sub-letting no-show rooms out to local pimps for cash. That's partly why I wondered about the possibility of swinging facilities being made available under the cover of respectability without the corporates blessing.

Just a thought.

I came across your post whilst trawling through the website and it reminded me once when I was working that I tried to book some rooms at a local hotel for a meeting we were having at my office just down the road. Some of the delegates wanted to stay overnight as they had long journeys t do. Anyway, when I phoned the hotel to book rooms she asked me for my code, and I thought "what code" and she said "you need a code to book rooms" when I said I don't know what the hell you're talking about she said I'm sorry I can't take any bookings from you. When I mentioned it someone the next day they said "didn't you know it's the local 'knocking shop'". I was only about 20 at the time and very innocent. big grin

I did find accommodation elsewhere for the delegates but passed that hotel/knocking shop in my car for many years afterwards. Its been demolished and turned into flats now.

by Guest 30.06.20 19:04

If they were swingers why did Gerry say he hadn't gone there for a f@#£ing holiday? Did he have to be coerced to join in? Can't quite reconcile the two myself.

by cookiemuncher 30.06.20 20:02

Lance De Boils wrote:To throw a weird one into the mix (or a couple of,) Say G&K were having an almighty domestic and one threw something at the other? Eg a wine bottle, A can of beans? It missed the intended target but clobbered a wee girl hiding behind the sofa?

There were blood spurts up the walls, on the curtains, on the back of the sofa and blood in the grouting of the tiles on the floor which evidence showed that it had been scrubbed off with cleaning liquids. There was also a toothbrush missing, 2 toothbrushes for 3 kids, yeah right. Knowing how particular kids are and possessive about their possessions I doubt the twins or Madeleine would have wanted to share their toothbrush with anyone.

The blood spurts were more in line with a tracheostomy being performed where an incision has to be made into the windpipe. The PJ files show the blood spots which couldn't have been left by someone that had cut themselves shaving as we keep being told. The sofa was also pushed up against the wall where the blood spots were.

by Verdi 30.06.20 21:49

Conclusions:

On 4 August there were collected at [the above address]: Apartment 5a, Ocean Club

- Three (3) spots from the floor, numbered as trace evidence 1 to 3;

- Ten (10) spots from the wall, numbered as trace evidence 4 to 13;

- Two (2) spots from the back of one blue, cloth-upholstered sofa existing in the living room, numbered as trace evidence 14 to 15;

- Two blue curtains with white curtain lining from one of the windows of the living
room, numbered as trace evidence 16.

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

I don't know where the scrubbed floor suggestion comes from, nor a missing toothbrush. Forum myth I venture to suggest. There certainly wasn't spurts of blood up the walls, on the curtains nor the back of the sofa - they were spots (stains) detected by standard forensic methodology, as can be seen the PJ files.