MADELEINE MCCANN BOOK WAS FOR TWINS' EYES ONLY

sheila.edwards wrote:

ufercoffy wrote:For twins eyes only?  

Of course, Kate, money had nothing to do with it did it? Why not self publish and just keep it for the twins eyes only then?

Why did Kate think the twins would want to read about their sister's genitals?

The sharper minded amongst us might have a case to put forward to social services. Is it possible that the children might be traumatised by the contents of this bewch? Is this perhaps something that social services could offer a pro active counselling service for? After all look at the records face value. They have lost 1 child through neglect (and I have yet to see any statement from any social services that denies this fact) so it could be used as an "at risk assessment". Anybody who has spent any time with social services will tell you that the phrase "CHILDREN ARE AT RISK" opens and closes ALL doors.
Gerry McCann clearly has this creepy all controlling effect upon his wife, (evil heartless bitch she may be but still under control). Is he going to be able to control his children's very thoughts when they reach their teens and start questioning things? Or is he going to include them in this smoke and mirrors web that we all can see so clearly through. That suspicion in itself should be enough to warrant a "CHILDREN MAY BE AT RISK" investigation. Or have Leicestershire County social services been bought off as well as the BBC and the government.

ROSA wrote:
WAS FOR TWINS’ EYES ONLY 





KATE McCann wanted Madeleine’s younger siblings, twins Sean and Amelie, to be the only ones to read her heartbreaking book about her daughter’s abduction. 

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I was enjoying a late lunch until I read that, JD!

Won't the twins be thrilled to hear about their parents' sex lives too......not to mention how to treat people who are only doing their job - call them effing tossers and refuse to co-operate with them.

jd wrote:

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:I was enjoying a late lunch until I read that, JD!

Won't the twins be thrilled to hear about their parents' sex lives too......not to mention how to treat people who are only doing their job - call them effing tossers and refuse to co-operate with them.

You don't know how close I came in posting up some tony blair photos yesterday!!!

Its sad to say but in reality I think the twins will be brainwashed as they grow up into their parents way of thinking. If they can publish a bewk saying it was only meant for the twins, with all the content that is in it, then it doesn't bode well for a normal correct upbringing. You can only hope the twins will have a very strong belief of right over wrong, but when its your parents and family most will be brainwashed. Ive noticed over the last year or so how the mccanns are bringing the twins into public eye more and more
See earlier post.
Gerry McCann clearly has this creepy all controlling effect upon his wife, (evil heartless bitch she may be but still under control). Is he going to be able to control his children's very thoughts when they reach their teens and start questioning things? Or is he going to include them in this smoke and mirrors web that we all can see so clearly through. That suspicion in itself should be enough to warrant a "CHILDREN MAY BE AT RISK" investigation. Or have Leicestershire County social services been bought off as well as the BBC and the government.
Anyone on here see a way through this using social services. Surely an anonymous letter suggesting what we believe to be the truth with some good examples of what is the truth will be enough to stimulate the CHILDREN AT RISK department into at least taking a speculative interest. You cannot sue Social Services for doing the investigative job they are empowered and obliged to do.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Speaking personally, I would be happy to see the relevant Social Services departments investigate the home lives of all the Tapas mob's children as anyone who associates with the McCanns may be of a similar inclination.
 
P.S. Thank you JD, spare us any Tony Blair photos for as long as possible!

Châtelaine wrote:How do we now social services haven't been involved yet? It's not exactly something they would "advertise", is it?
Knowing she wrote the bewk for the twins and then knowing what's written in the bewk, makes my stomach turn ... And I'm not a "softy".

The children "At Risk" register is pretty insecure and I cannot see a council IT employee holding it as a secret if their names were on it. And I cannot envisage a situation where everyone in Social or childrens services is going to fall for the same bullshit.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Allegedly a certain Dr P was in the habit of bathing other people's children, even those whose parents he did not know particularly well. I wonder if they have bath-overs at his house now as a variation on sleep-overs.

Châtelaine wrote:

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Allegedly a certain Dr P was in the habit of bathing other people's children, even those whose parents he did not know particularly well. I wonder if they have bath-overs at his house now as a variation on sleep-overs.

***
Madeleine asked why they didn't come when she was crying [the twins were crying, she & Sean were crying - take your pick ...] and her parents wondered: when could that have been? When they were being bathed ? When they were being put to bed? ...  

Châtelaine wrote:That's what sickens me too, Nina. And I do have the inclination that this may be a "clue". IMO, always IMO ...

What you and Nina are talking about is just rumour. It is a great way to detract from the factual truth. Horrible those things you refer to my be but they are still just rumour, just like the so called "crying episode". Nobody has come forward with a STATEMENT. It is this RUMOUR that the McCanns rely upon because it can be so easily trashed. Not so a STATEMENT.