Did Jim Gamble Sanitize Gerry McCann's CATS File 19309?

Posted by Himself on Good quality wristbands

Because if he did, it would certainly be in keeping with all the other anomalous behavior exhibited by Jim Gamble regarding Arguido, Gerry McCann. (See Jim Gamble tag)

http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/2012/01/did-jim-gamble-sanitize-gerry-mccanns.html

"the reference for this conviction still exists in the judiscial reference files" :wink4:

The Sargeants Inn

Jim Gamble in Washington DC - Facing Up To Illicit Mimetic Desires



Author Blackwatch (of 12/04/2010 @ 09:59:26,
in News,
viewed 60 times)


Interesting that Jim Gamble - head of CEOPS - and the man alleged to have been appointed by the Home Office to write a preliminary review of the Madeleine McCann Investigation
should be in Washington DC today (Monday 12th April) as this is where
Kevin Halligen and his business partners Andre Hollis and Ken Irish
were residing until his run in with the FBI (in fact, this is where
Halligen was building his home).
According to Press Reports he is meeting with Facebook Officials to discuss 252 messages of concern
that remain unanswered and the practicality of a 'panic button' on the
website (which sounds fantastic if the button is going to be part of a
much more rigorous moderation procedure too - as on its own it seems a
bit gimmicky).

Facebook is owned by Rupert Murdcoh's News Corp. That it was founded at Harvard University
in Boston only compounds speculation that it has the backing of the CIA
as part of its data-mining (and policy shaping) activities. That it has
been successfully deployed in several policy making and concensus
building projects already will only throw more fuel on the fire (former
Defense advisor, Howard Cox of Greylock Venture Capital and In-Q-Tel - the Venture Capital Wing of the CIA - invested $27 million). Such concerns were raised in 2008 by Tom Hodgkinson of The Gurdian.

The
problem Gamble is likely to encounter is that if Facebook is being used
as part of data-mining and surveillance activities it really needs to
retain its illusion of being unpoliced. The alternative risks forcing
people underground and dispersed to various dark corners of cyberspace,
making surveillance virtually impossible.
One of its founders, Jim Breyer is also co-founder and CEO of the virtual banking system PayPal - the preferred payment method of websites like Three Arguidos and Find Madeleine. Another founder is Peter Thiel - a committed neoconservative and libertarian. Tom Hodgkinson explains:

Thiel's philosophical mentor is one René Girard of Stanford
University, proponent of a theory of human behaviour called mimetic
desire. Girard reckons that people are essentially sheep-like and will
copy one another without much reflection. The theory would also seem to
be proved correct in the case of Thiel's virtual worlds: the desired
object is irrelevant; all you need to know is that human beings will
tend to move in flocks. Hence financial bubbles. Hence the enormous
popularity of Facebook.
...snipped( re history of setting up two pop stars both owned by Sony)

They sit at their PC Terminals and somehow end up at
Facebook's door. These are new enchanted gardens where men and girls
come and go like moths among the whisperings and the champagne and
under the canopy of pixel holes and stars that make up their computer
screens. The forces exherted from either side propel them forward. And
because they are only given two options to choose from (both owned by
Sony Music) it is inevitable that both Sony artists will perform well
in the Xmas charts. The only choice open to the sheep, is which pen
they are herded into.

This is how easy it is to manage opinion and create policy. Does it remind you of anything else you've seen recently?

Facebook recently relocated its HQ to Dublin.

Oalkey International (with Andre Hollis and Timothy Unruh) and Oakley Strategic Services
(with Ken Irish) were both incorporated in Washington DC. Many of
Halligen's associates continue to work in the capital as Defense
Advisors and Lobbyists.
unquote

I found this on MM, since it's Sergeants, I'm sure it's OK to post?
I was actually looking for a poster some 8-10 months ago, who said that the file 19309 had been accessed some months before 3/5/07.
Just the right date I'd think.
Everything that happened before the holiday is imo far more important than 3/5 .

Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:Posted by Himself on Good quality wristbands

Because if he did, it would certainly be in keeping with all the other anomalous behavior exhibited by Jim Gamble regarding Arguido, Gerry McCann. (See Jim Gamble tag)

http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/2012/01/did-jim-gamble-sanitize-gerry-mccanns.html

Dunno


but I bet he has the clout to do it, still very dodgy though


I would think it would need to be approved by mi5/gchq




just found this from 2010, on icke, to add to the mix....




The media virtually unanimously believe the McCanns are guilty.
The investigating police believe sincerely that the McCanns are guilty.

Personally i also believe they are guilty.
The McCanns are connected up to the hilt with the Labour government and although that in itself is not a crime, the current Labour government is the most corrupt in history and also one which has been involved in cover ups and judicial killings as well as massive fraud and illegal wars.

Gerry McCann is not the biological father of Madeline, she was born as the result of a sperm donor.

Again this does not make them guilty but it creates a motive especially as the twins are Gerry McCann's biological children.

The fact that the McCanns are using Carter-Ruck who are one of the most venomous solicitors firms in the UK. (I know them personally.)
And have sued and gagged anyone and everyone who has said anything against the McCanns.
It is almost like Holohoax all over again.
Websites have been shut down, newspapers have all made big payouts, etc.
As we have seen in the case of John Terry a gagging order usually denotes guilt.
And as we discovered Avram Grant's trips to the brothel after that too was claimed to be covered by privacy laws.
So in my view the precedent is that anyone who tries to shut up the media usually has something to hide.

The campaign that was kicked off instantly led me to believe something was wrong. The Tapas dishes had hardly been cleared away and instantly the McCanns had a website up an running with flash graphics and advanced functioning and donation accounts were already opened.
An advert was shown on tv and at wembley stadium within days.
An Labour government insider Clarence Mitchell gave up his £70K job to become their PR spin doctor.

Their body language looks to me like they are guilty.
Just like Amanda Knox when she was in court.
I just think they learned from the Labour Party how to lie and lie and lie again

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/GerryKateMcCannAP_468x372.jpg

In a moment of clarity (or was it a mild fever?) last night, I realised why Gerry might have made such an early and strident claim that Madeleine had been "taken by paedophiles".
What other claim would have brought the Ambassador rushing down from Lisbon? Would "taken by a greasy stubble-chinned dropout" have had the desired effect?
Consider this, from Ray Wyre, now deceased:

"At one stage the Americans were so concerned about the role of British paedophiles in Portugal that I was approached about the targeting of schools there. International co-operation should be part of police thinking."

What if, there's a network extending from the Embassy through the Consulates down to convivial places such as the OC? The mention of "paedophiles" and whoooooooosh.............here comes the Diplomatic Brigade and here beginneth the Great Cover-up. At all costs, these people - however undesirable and held in contempt - must be handled with kid gloves. Must even be allowed to become celebrities and ambassadors of a sort.
Does that make sense, or am I still feverish?

O, I think it's a very large part of the whole thing. However, the Ambassador wouldn't have come down without the FO telling him to do so. Ambassadors are just that - messenger boys.
As I'm convinced Maddie was dead very early on, it makes sense that HQ in London would know something was going on before 3/5.
Lisbon is a good three hours drive away. The Ambassador was called during the night - say at midnight. Unless they had his home number, that would get the duty officer who wouldn't wake up the Ambassador for a child just two hours gone. At the time they pushed the abduction but not the paedophile angle.
So, imo the earliest the Ambassador heard was at breakfast - I think it more likely that London phoned him and told him to get the hell over there. I think it was GB who phoned him - all trails lead to GB time and time again. The one person who could instruct the FO what to do very quickly.
Otherwise - if a request comes from lower down, it has to go up the hierarchical ladder. Takes time. Things moved so fast, it could only have come from the top.

kikoraton wrote:In a moment of clarity (or was it a mild fever?) last night, I realised why Gerry might have made such an early and strident claim that Madeleine had been "taken by paedophiles".
What other claim would have brought the Ambassador rushing down from Lisbon? Would "taken by a greasy stubble-chinned dropout" have had the desired effect?
Consider this, from Ray Wyre, now deceased:

"At one stage the Americans were so concerned about the role of British paedophiles in Portugal that I was approached about the targeting of schools there. International co-operation should be part of police thinking."

What if, there's a network extending from the Embassy through the Consulates down to convivial places such as the OC? The mention of "paedophiles" and whoooooooosh.............here comes the Diplomatic Brigade and here beginneth the Great Cover-up. At all costs, these people - however undesirable and held in contempt - must be handled with kid gloves. Must even be allowed to become celebrities and ambassadors of a sort.
Does that make sense, or am I still feverish?

There was no paedophilia in re.

If so, they would have shut up about it.

The fact they cried Wolf immediately almost proves something totally different was afoot.

Has anybody put forward that these paragons of virtue could have been so inebriated they simply offed their child, forgetting all about it afterwards?

As in: I am drunk, I come in, you are there, you ask me to stay with you because you have left me befire when I cried;
I am so into someone else, I would rather stay there than stay with you;

I ask you to shut up;
You keep on yelling at me;
I ask again, politely;
You keep on yelling;
I tell you to shut up;
You keep yelling;
I drag you from your bed;
You fight me, as you fought your grandmother in the 'birtdaycake picture', legs flying in all directions;
I am so drunk I almost drop you;
you keep yelling: Daddy Daddy:

I get a hold on you and I crush your ffing yelling head against the wall

tigger - So, imo the earliest the Ambassador heard was at breakfast - I think it more likely that London phoned him and told him to get the hell over there. I think it was GB who phoned him - all trails lead to GB time and time again. The one person who could instruct the FO what to do very quickly.

Couldn't it just be the case of GB & co pulling all the stops for a brother Mason? The Mccanns - the Lodge - the Catholic Church. Makes me shudder to think

Ribisl wrote:

tigger - So, imo the earliest the Ambassador heard was at breakfast - I think it more likely that London phoned him and told him to get the hell over there. I think it was GB who phoned him - all trails lead to GB time and time again. The one person who could instruct the FO what to do very quickly.

Couldn't it just be the case of GB & co pulling all the stops for a brother Mason? The Mccanns - the Lodge - the Catholic Church. Makes me shudder to think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-qX9ERql50
The above is GB and his master masonic handshake. Must have been on the square for a very long time.

You may be right, but in that case I also think that G must have done him a favour or two - Gerry can only have been very low down in the 'club' so why should GB so much more than necessary and say that it was a matter of national security?

This link is quite amusing but I agree with every word:
http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-does-this-remind-you-of.html?spref=fb.

Although the idea of the McCs having a substitute complicates matters, it would simplify the disposal of a body and the subsequent clean-up.
Imo the whole scheme could have been timed to curry favour with a large enterprise about to start. It backfired spectacularly and for reasons best known to GB et all, the cover-up was comprehensive and immediate.
I've always said that Gerry reminds me more of Delboy than anything else. Big ideas, badly executed.

tigger wrote:

Ribisl wrote:

tigger - So, imo the earliest the Ambassador heard was at breakfast - I think it more likely that London phoned him and told him to get the hell over there. I think it was GB who phoned him - all trails lead to GB time and time again. The one person who could instruct the FO what to do very quickly.

Couldn't it just be the case of GB & co pulling all the stops for a brother Mason? The Mccanns - the Lodge - the Catholic Church. Makes me shudder to think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-qX9ERql50
The above is GB and his master masonic handshake. Must have been on the square for a very long time.

You may be right, but in that case I also think that G must have done him a favour or two - Gerry can only have been very low down in the 'club' so why should GB so much more than necessary and say that it was a matter of national security?

This link is quite amusing but I agree with every word:
http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-does-this-remind-you-of.html?spref=fb.

Although the idea of the McCs having a substitute complicates matters, it would simplify the disposal of a body and the subsequent clean-up.
Imo the whole scheme could have been timed to curry favour with a large enterprise about to start. It backfired spectacularly and for reasons best known to GB et all, the cover-up was comprehensive and immediate.
I've always said that Gerry reminds me more of Delboy than anything else. Big ideas, badly executed.

GB is an ill tempered bully and a control freak who wouldn’t miss an opportunity like that to show who’s the boss because it makes him feel powerful and worthy. I don’t think it’s necessarily the case of him ‘returning a favour’ as you suggest.

I am mostly in agreement with you but I cannot get my head around the substitute theory because I don’t see the purpose of having a substitute. As for the idea that G was carrying a sub girl towards the beach so to be seen by some witnesses I am afraid it’s a pure fantasy unless I am missing something. It could have been G with M’s body (can't be that stupid as I said in another thread) or somebody with M (dead or alive), or some totally innocent father carrying his child home.

Please excuse my ignorance but could someone tell me what CAT/CATS actually stands for?

So if I am understanding properly GM actually has a conviction for child abuse of some sort?

http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/10/07/cats-case-administration-tracking-system/

Does anyone have a date for when the CATS file was opened for G McCann ? Was it before or after 3rd May, 2007.

"I am mostly in agreement with you but I cannot get my head around the substitute theory because I don’t see the purpose of having a substitute. As for the idea that G was carrying a sub girl towards the beach so to be seen by some witnesses I am afraid it’s a pure fantasy "
Your point 2, ribisl, agreed.
Point 1:The substitute allowed the crime of Maddie's disappearance, and the disposal of her body, the covering-up of said crime and the mounting of a hoax abduction, to take place in the required period of days before the declaration at 2200 on 3 May. It provided a substitute called Madalene to take Maddie's place in the creche from 0945 on 29 April until 1730 on 3 May, thus naturally convincing the creche staff and the whole world* that Maddie McCann had been alive until the evening of 3 May.
* until I ran the gauntlet of the doubters and convinced many people (not just "two" as Tony would claim) that Robert Naylor, father of Elizabeth, had allowed Gerry to impersonate him by signing Elizabeth into creche, whilst stupidly forgetting to adapt his handwriting style. Elizabeth attended the Lobster Group accompanied in most sessions by her best friend, Madalene R...., who naturally was also signed in by Gerry McCann. Two girls, same handwriting.
That was the purpose of having a substitute.

Ribisl wrote:http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/10/07/cats-case-administration-tracking-system/

Thanks for that Ribisl, I will take it to heart. Would still like to know whether this is standard operating procedure in the case of a missing child.
Or was this one of the many exceptions this case seems to throw up. In any case it's empty, I have designed classified retrieval systems but never created a file without it having a content.

Thank you kikoraton. I obviously need to do a bit more homework on all the facts (as much as we are allowed to know at this stage) but I see no reason not to believe Mrs Fern's statement which goes

She states that on the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22H30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger.

Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted "Daddy, Daddy", the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23H45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.

Does this not mean Madeleine was alive that night though evidently neglected and left to cry for a long time? I find it implausible the Mcs would bring in a substitute to sleep in Madeleine's bed, abandon her alone with the twins and go off to dine with friends the whole evening. A substitute of Madeleine's age would not have remained in a strange bed in a strange apartment crying for her daddy.

Sorry if we are going a bit off topic here but not sure where else to post

tigger have you seen this?

Blog News
I have arrived at the conclusion that it was a mistake for me to re-open this and other McCann related blogs. There will be no more updates, comments will close after today. Thank you.

http://goodqualitywristbands.blogspot.com/

kikoraton wrote:"I am mostly in agreement with you but I cannot get my head around the substitute theory because I don’t see the purpose of having a substitute. As for the idea that G was carrying a sub girl towards the beach so to be seen by some witnesses I am afraid it’s a pure fantasy "
Your point 2, ribisl, agreed.
Point 1:The substitute allowed the crime of Maddie's disappearance, and the disposal of her body, the covering-up of said crime and the mounting of a hoax abduction, to take place in the required period of days before the declaration at 2200 on 3 May. It provided a substitute called Madalene to take Maddie's place in the creche from 0945 on 29 April until 1730 on 3 May, thus naturally convincing the creche staff and the whole world* that Maddie McCann had been alive until the evening of 3 May.
* until I ran the gauntlet of the doubters and convinced many people (not just "two" as Tony would claim) that Robert Naylor, father of Elizabeth, had allowed Gerry to impersonate him by signing Elizabeth into creche, whilst stupidly forgetting to adapt his handwriting style. Elizabeth attended the Lobster Group accompanied in most sessions by her best friend, Madalene R...., who naturally was also signed in by Gerry McCann. Two girls, same handwriting.
That was the purpose of having a substitute.

Kikoraton, good evening. May I just for starters discuss this snip with you please?



Point 1:The substitute allowed the crime of Maddie's disappearance, and the disposal of her body, the covering-up of said crime and the mounting of a hoax abduction, to take place in the required period of days before the declaration at 2200 on 3 May. It provided a substitute called Madalene to take Maddie's place in the creche from 0945 on 29 April until 1730 on 3 May, thus naturally convincing the creche staff and the whole world* that Maddie McCann had been alive until the evening of 3 May.


Soooo, did Gerry have to frantically find a substitute on the evening/night of the 28th in preparation for the morning session of the 29th, or, is it your opinion that it was already arranged? And the girl was called Madalene so that was handy, was she also blonde and a friend of Jane's eldest girl?

Not arguing at all just asking.

Ribisl wrote:Thank you kikoraton. I obviously need to do a bit more homework on all the facts (as much as we are allowed to know at this stage) but I see no reason not to believe Mrs Fern's statement which goes

She states that on the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22H30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger.

Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted "Daddy, Daddy", the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23H45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.

Does this not mean Madeleine was alive that night though evidently neglected and left to cry for a long time? I find it implausible the Mcs would bring in a substitute to sleep in Madeleine's bed, abandon her alone with the twins and go off to dine with friends the whole evening. A substitute of Madeleine's age would not have remained in a strange bed in a strange apartment crying for her daddy.

Sorry if we are going a bit off topic here but not sure where else to post

if this was a substitute Maddie, she might well have cried for her daddy even though looked after by an adult she did not know. Just because a child cries and is inconsolable does not mean that child is alone.
I dont believe the McCann twins or any of the tapas children were ever abandoned by the adults.

The way these people handled their children -which were defenselsess- conjures up a vista of utter horror.

Maddie? Up & gone. In roll the millions.

Sean? A slack puppet arms hanging down seen toted off the escapeflight;

Amelie? So totally unlike Maddie; are they related at all?

Uggh

russiandoll wrote:

Ribisl wrote:Thank you kikoraton. I obviously need to do a bit more homework on all the facts (as much as we are allowed to know at this stage) but I see no reason not to believe Mrs Fern's statement which goes

She states that on the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22H30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger.

Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted "Daddy, Daddy", the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23H45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.

Does this not mean Madeleine was alive that night though evidently neglected and left to cry for a long time? I find it implausible the Mcs would bring in a substitute to sleep in Madeleine's bed, abandon her alone with the twins and go off to dine with friends the whole evening. A substitute of Madeleine's age would not have remained in a strange bed in a strange apartment crying for her daddy.

Sorry if we are going a bit off topic here but not sure where else to post

if this was a substitute Maddie, she might well have cried for her daddy even though looked after by an adult she did not know. Just because a child cries and is inconsolable does not mean that child is alone.
I dont believe the McCann twins or any of the tapas children were ever abandoned by the adults.

It is interesting that there were quite a number of phone calls that evening on Kate's phone and the indication was that she was at the OC - probably in 5a - so was she babysitting? Just two minutes after the phone calls stopped, the crying began.

Ribisl wrote:http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/10/07/cats-case-administration-tracking-system/

Thank you

I don't believe the sub would have slept at the McC apartment. With her own parents, or sleeping-over with her great buddy E Naylor.
Planned long in advance.

kikoraton wrote:I don't believe the sub would have slept at the McC apartment. With her own parents, or sleeping-over with her great buddy E Naylor.
Planned long in advance.

Hear, hear! simple enough imo. 5a was possibly for the twins from very late to eight in the morning.
Is Naylor also linked to Landsbanki? I keep thinking that in 2007 the signs of financial collapse were there for at least professionals to see. Just a thought re cooperation apart from 'brotherly help'.

Naylor is/was linked to landsbanki