WOW A MUST READ -Madeleine clues hidden for five years - Sunday Times Full article now on Page 1

ultimaThule wrote:

Portia wrote:

aquila wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

The one on the far right has an earring.

What also strikes me, time and again, is the kindness in his eyes

I agree.  The late Mr Monteiro looks to have been a gentle soul and I'm sure he's resting in a peace the McCanns will never know.

When touring Portugal the past weeks, I tried to stay au courant with the case in the Portuguese press. What really struck me was, with how much respect they treated all parties concerned, even the McCs whose points of view were reflected without any names calling a/o insults. As for the family of the late mr Monteiro: nothing but compassion there too, especially for his widow, son and the rest of his family. 

I got a funny feeling there: that the UK media continued to be spun with all sorts of so-called PJ-related nonsense, whereas the PJ itself, and the Portuguese Judiciary as a whole went into lockdown the minute the case was reopened there. My conclusion was, that Tractor man must be a figment of UK spin, not a result of PJ investigating, let alone from PJ leaking to the media. 

Figure it out for yourself: as it is forbidden for the Portuguese Judiciary/PJ to utter the merest statement on current affairs, how did the tale of mr. Monteiro come to raise its ugly head, and how could a picture of a black man emerge to be put on the UK front pages? 

Who found that picture, selected it, made the decision to put it on their front pages? 

Who thought he could get away with that, that he would not be sued by mr. Monteiros kin? 

Who would be capable of behaving like that? 
And why would he do so? 

On whose orders?

Or: to protect which interests?

I point to the same phenomenon re:

1. Dead mr. Hewlett;
2. the two inmates -convicted and put away for life- whose pictures were in the papers two weeks ago, compared with the two efits- who allegedly might have traveled to Portugal on false passports, even though no one has come forward to give evidence when they would have done so and where they would have traveled, let alone if, or when, they would have been in a position to abduct little Maddie from her bedroom on May 3rd around the assumed timeframe;
3. Dead mr. Monteiro

There is something strange going on. It seems lists of dead people or lifelong jail sentences are available and perused, and when they chance upon someone dead or locked away for ever, they think its ok to accuse that person of something, of a connection with the case. 

So not: we have evidence, and from that evidence we progress to a person, no, it is:

We have a dead person, who cannot react, talk back to uw, put Carter Ruck on our path: hey, you know what, let's now have this one for a patsy, and see where it leads us. 

This, Peter Mac, is not how the world of police inquiries ought to be run, or has the world I grew up in died around me/us?

Portia wrote:
This, Peter Mac, is not how the world of police inquiries ought to be run, or has the world I grew up in died around me/us?

Quite so. Nothing about this case makes sense at any level.

Now that Tannerman has come forward / been positively identified / blown out of the water / been proved to be an invention . .it is worth re-reading one or two of the "unhelpful" and "defamatory" and probably 'ludicrous' articles written some time ago, to see how prescient some of them actually were.

This one, for example

http://thetapas9janetanner.blogspot.com.es/2012/03/mccann-mumsnets-jane-tanner-tanner-in.html?spref=tw
By Dr Roberts.
#McCann : #Mumsnet's JANE TANNER : The Framing Of Murat - BUT should the story go 'belly up', then it was nothing to do with Gerald McCann was it?

Portia wrote:

aquila wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

The one on the far right has an earring.

What also strikes me, time and again, is the kindness in his eyes

 what strikes me time and again about e fits 1 and 2........flatheads  r us.  

Whenever I read that [flat heads] I'm reminded of a poster on a forum [sorry, cannot remember who and where], whose father always told her "not to trust a man with a head flat enough to put a pint on".  

a new  e fit of a flatheaded suspect

  

PeterMac wrote:Now that Tannerman has come forward / been positively identified / blown out of the water / been proved to be an invention . .it is worth re-reading one or two of the "unhelpful" and "defamatory" and probably 'ludicrous' articles written some time ago, to see how prescient some of them actually were.

This one, for example

http://thetapas9janetanner.blogspot.com.es/2012/03/mccann-mumsnets-jane-tanner-tanner-in.html?spref=tw
By Dr Roberts.
#McCann : #Mumsnet's JANE TANNER : The Framing Of Murat - BUT should the story go 'belly up', then it was nothing to do with Gerald McCann was it?

Whoa...  When I clicked the link and spotted the picture immediately flash up....I had a quick thought of "Geez...She don't half look like her brother Robert" 

PeterMac wrote:

Portia wrote:
This, Peter Mac, is not how the world of police inquiries ought to be run, or has the world I grew up in died around me/us?

Quite so.  Nothing about this case makes sense at any level.

TNX

You know, Portugal is an impressive country, with remarkable people. 

We got lost. Me, the only one with a smattering of the language around approached the PJ motor brigade at hand asked for directions, was told to get back into the car; then a motor with a blue light on and another one escorted us out unto the highway. 

This is just a single example of the friendliness and welcome we received here

Lovely Portugal!  GO THERE! VISIT! YOU WILL BE RECEIVED LIKE FAMILY THERE!

Which UK interests allowed the McCs to run amuck there?

Dammit!

ultimaThule wrote:MW guests who wished to eat at the Tapas in the evening were required to book each day because, unlike the Millenium, it was a small establishment with a limited number of covers.   

The fact the McCanns and their pals were able to insist on overriding this rule and make a block booking for the entire week gives some indication of the entitlement the group as a whole exhibited, having no thought whatsoever for the other families with young children who were also accomodated close to this bar/restaurant.

I seem to recall reading something to the effect that this selfishness had been noted by some of those who weren't able to get a booking due to the group having, effectively, commandeered the Tapas restaurant night after night - if I'd been one of those deprived guests I'd have kicked off big-time. 

It's my belief that after the group's first night they had no intention of having any more evening meals at the Millenium but that, earlier in the week, they had planned to spend Thursday night sans their offspring dining in one of the town's restaurants and this plan had go by the board in order to act out the pantomime which took place at the Tapas on the night of 3 May 2007.

Fwiw, even if buggies were available to rent in the resort and had been pre-booked to be available on arrival, what parent would contemplate juggling 3 small children plus cases/hand luggage and hanging around an airport for a couple of hours with no guarantee the flight would leave on time without these essential items? 

Not to mention the small question of their having given the route they wheeled their carriages to the beach which is noted in one of the documents available at mccannfiles.com

There are lies, more lies, and damned lies; the McCanns have proved themselves to have a propensity for telling every kind of lie in their attempt to hide the truth.

And completely inadequate as parents and doctors.

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Certainly if one was to show the picture of Gerry compared to the one of Tractorman to someone who was wholly unaware of the case and had never heard of the McCanns, and asked them which face they thought more trustworthy, there would only be one answer. Purely of face value you understand.

IMO Gerald Patrick McCann has one redeeming feature - he looks what he is.

ultimaThule wrote:

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Certainly if one was to show the picture of Gerry compared to the one of Tractorman to someone who was wholly unaware of the case and had never heard of the McCanns, and asked them which face they thought more trustworthy, there would only be one answer. Purely of face value you understand.

IMO Gerald Patrick McCann has one redeeming feature - he looks what he is.

We can't lie. It comes out one way or another.

While the Smithman sighting is hotly debated elsewhere and after hundreds and hundreds of posts on this article have been made, it might be worthwhile to revisit this aspect of the article.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

In the hundreds of pages of posts, many of which I had to skip purely on the basis that I don't have enough free hours in my days to read each and every page, there may well be adequate discussion on the following points, but maybe there are opinions amongst forum members that have not been voiced yet so here goes:

a) What could the investigators, in the pay of the McCanns, find to be so "hypercritical" of? Did the PI's dare to question the shaky story as presented by Team McCann? Were they not co-operative in answering questions? What could be so bad, that legal action was threatened if the report were made public?

b) The McCanns lobbied long and hard for a British review and a re-opening of the case if their own words are to be taken at face value. Given the MILLIONS of pounds invested in this case by the British Taxpayer, why did Scotland Yard have to ASK for certain information? Why was it not handed to the police THE MINUTE the e-fits were made? Why waste ANY opportunity to move this case forward?

c) Given that Kate gives quite a lot of time to Smithman in her book, Brian Kennedy went to Ireland to speak to the Smiths, and the McCanns constant assertion that they wanted new information, would do ANYTHING, to bring Madeleine home etc etc, WHY did they not hand this e-fit to the police BEFORE the review was underway, waiting FIVE YEARS and only then handing the information over when specifically ASKED for it?

The reason for bringing this up, after so much has already been said on the matter, is that I cannot think for the life of me, what the McCanns were thinking. They talk about fully co-operating with the police, but surely, only total idiots would not think that this decision would look absolutely terrible to the SY review/investigation team. How on earth, when faced with 37 investigating officers, did they think it would be OK to withhold information, that Redwood now says is the "breakthrough"?

Their claims that this information would be "distracting" is ridiculous.

Their claims that they could not afford to investigate this sighting is beyond ludicrous.

In a nutshell, how the HELL did they justify this bizarre and secretive manoeuvre to the SY investigating team? And what on earth did they think this would look like? It is ONE OF THE MOST suspicious and incriminating decisions by Team McCann of the whole case IMO.

Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

Smokeandmirrors wrote:How on earth, when faced with 37 investigating officers, did they think it would be OK to withhold information, that Redwood now says is the "breakthrough"? 

Sorry, I don't believe Redwood. After Crimewatch came great defamation of groups and individuals  in the press. Kate speaks on TV and SY remains silent and everyone can see that this case disappears in Nirvana.

flaxyard wrote:Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

I don't think they need to look at things in a new light, I think they probably have a reasonable understanding of what happened, and who is responsible, but it all comes down to the old saying "knowing and proving are 2 different things". If you can't prove it, then they can't say it, especially when legal gags are likely to be used. 

Scotland Yard are in a position where they cannot realistically say anything other than please help us. That is until they can say, and prove exactly what happened, and either recover Madeleine or bring a case somewhere. The problem is that them saying please help us and very little else, fits with both them keeping quiet until they are in a position to prove something, but also fits with them being forced to apply another agenda that doesn't fit with fair and proper policing. I just hope it's the former, for the sake of the integrity of our country.

Smokeandmirrors wrote:While the Smithman sighting is hotly debated elsewhere and after hundreds and hundreds of posts on this article have been made, it might be worthwhile to revisit this aspect of the article.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

In the hundreds of pages of posts, many of which I had to skip purely on the basis that I don't have enough free hours in my days to read each and every page, there may well be adequate discussion on the following points, but maybe there are opinions amongst forum members that have not been voiced yet so here goes:

a) What could the investigators, in the pay of the McCanns, find to be so "hypercritical" of? Did the PI's dare to question the shaky story as presented by Team McCann? Were they not co-operative in answering questions? What could be so bad, that legal action was threatened if the report were made public?

b) The McCanns lobbied long and hard for a British review and a re-opening of the case if their own words are to be taken at face value. Given the MILLIONS of pounds invested in this case by the British Taxpayer, why did Scotland Yard have to ASK for certain information? Why was it not handed to the police THE MINUTE the e-fits were made? Why waste ANY opportunity to move this case forward?

c) Given that Kate gives quite a lot of time to Smithman in her book, Brian Kennedy went to Ireland to speak to the Smiths, and the McCanns constant assertion that they wanted new information, would do ANYTHING, to bring Madeleine home etc etc, WHY did they not hand this e-fit to the police BEFORE the review was underway, waiting FIVE YEARS and only then handing the information over when specifically ASKED for it?

The reason for bringing this up, after so much has already been said on the matter, is that I cannot think for the life of me, what the McCanns were thinking. They talk about fully co-operating with the police, but surely, only total idiots would not think that this decision would look absolutely terrible to the SY review/investigation team. How on earth, when faced with 37 investigating officers, did they think it would be OK to withhold information, that Redwood now says is the "breakthrough"?

Their claims that this information would be "distracting" is ridiculous.

Their claims that they could not afford to investigate this sighting is beyond ludicrous.

In a nutshell, how the HELL did they justify this bizarre and secretive manoeuvre to the SY investigating team? And what on earth did they think this would look like? It is ONE OF THE MOST suspicious and incriminating decisions by Team McCann of the whole case IMO.

The problem we have is that all your very much "to the point" questions should be being put to Team McCann by the media. Why aren't they? There can be no libel in asking such questions. Even the Insight Team have not, it seems asked those questions.

I believe the police must be thinking the same as you Smoke and Mirrors plus we have been told that others like TB, PeterM, Kikotron have sent them info.  Surely they are not going to ignore all of that?

ETA - Plus the info. has been sent to Mr. A. in Portugal, we must not forget that there is an investigation ongoing over there.

I am still optimistic (for now).

SchrodingersBody wrote:

flaxyard wrote:Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

I don't think they need to look at things in a new light, I think they probably have a reasonable understanding of what happened, and who is responsible, but it all comes down to the old saying "knowing and proving are 2 different things". If you can't prove it, then they can't say it, especially when legal gags are likely to be used. 

Scotland Yard are in a position where they cannot realistically say anything other than please help us. That is until they can say, and prove exactly what happened, and either recover Madeleine or bring a case somewhere. The problem is that them saying please help us and very little else, fits with both them keeping quiet until they are in a position to prove something, but also fits with them being forced to apply another agenda that doesn't fit with fair and proper policing. I just hope it's the former, for the sake of the integrity of our country.

I simply cannot accept that there is not now a collated body of evidence sufficient to bring the McCanns to trial. A person was sentenced to a minimum of 36yrs on circumstantial and mobile phone evidence in my county. So it is tosh to me that all these strands, together with the dogs, together with the palpable lying by this pair that we have on miles of video footage, is not enough for the CPS to bring out the rubber stamp. Absolute tosh.

No, there is something else standing in the way of this going forward and I have a pretty shrewd idea what.

ETA SchrodingersBody, I am not directing the tosh bit at you, it's the set up I refer to.

Mirage wrote:

SchrodingersBody wrote:

flaxyard wrote:Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

I don't think they need to look at things in a new light, I think they probably have a reasonable understanding of what happened, and who is responsible, but it all comes down to the old saying "knowing and proving are 2 different things". If you can't prove it, then they can't say it, especially when legal gags are likely to be used. 

Scotland Yard are in a position where they cannot realistically say anything other than please help us. That is until they can say, and prove exactly what happened, and either recover Madeleine or bring a case somewhere. The problem is that them saying please help us and very little else, fits with both them keeping quiet until they are in a position to prove something, but also fits with them being forced to apply another agenda that doesn't fit with fair and proper policing. I just hope it's the former, for the sake of the integrity of our country.

I simply cannot accept that there is not now a collated body of evidence sufficient to bring the McCanns to trial. A person was sentenced to a minimum of 36yrs on circumstantial and mobile phone evidence in my county. So it is tosh to me that all these strands, together with the dogs, together with the palpable lying by this pair that we have on miles of video footage, is not enough for the CPS to bring out the rubber stamp. Absolute tosh.

No, there is something else standing in the way of this going forward and I have a pretty shrewd idea what.

ETA SchrodingersBody, I am not directing the tosh bit at you, it's the set up I refer to.

Me too. There are soooo many cases where the investigators just have NOTHING to go on 
And here we are with this lot and masses and they are still gadding around playing rent a celeb

Portia wrote:

aquila wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

The one on the far right has an earring.

What also strikes me, time and again, is the kindness in his eyes

Hi Portia, I agree, I think he was an ok guy, and a family man too. His eyes are lush you want to trust him tractor man that is. The image on the left would creep me out regardless of whether I knew him or not. People who snear like that well...eeeekkk is all I can say lol.

Mirage wrote:

SchrodingersBody wrote:

flaxyard wrote:Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

I don't think they need to look at things in a new light, I think they probably have a reasonable understanding of what happened, and who is responsible, but it all comes down to the old saying "knowing and proving are 2 different things". If you can't prove it, then they can't say it, especially when legal gags are likely to be used. 

Scotland Yard are in a position where they cannot realistically say anything other than please help us. That is until they can say, and prove exactly what happened, and either recover Madeleine or bring a case somewhere. The problem is that them saying please help us and very little else, fits with both them keeping quiet until they are in a position to prove something, but also fits with them being forced to apply another agenda that doesn't fit with fair and proper policing. I just hope it's the former, for the sake of the integrity of our country.

I simply cannot accept that there is not now a collated body of evidence sufficient to bring the McCanns to trial. A person was sentenced to a minimum of 36yrs on circumstantial and mobile phone evidence in my county. So it is tosh to me that all these strands, together with the dogs, together with the palpable lying by this pair that we have on miles of video footage, is not enough for the CPS to bring out the rubber stamp. Absolute tosh.

No, there is something else standing in the way of this going forward and I have a pretty shrewd idea what.

ETA SchrodingersBody, I am not directing the tosh bit at you, it's the set up I refer to.

I think that there are thousands of us that share this opinion.

It will all come down to "who is the mightiest political force in the UK at this time". By this I mean, there are those clearly entangled in or political system at the highest levels, who have power and influence whose personal proclivities are DEEPLY criminal and depraved, hence the launch of operation Fernbridge. This is incontrovertible.

They also have political enemies, those in opposition, not merely to their abhorrent personal failings, but to their political position.

And the third "man" in this hideously twisted triangle is Public Interest. Someone somewhere will be wrangling with the whole sorry conundrum of how far this issue can be exposed. IF, and it is a big IF, someone somewhere has the gumption and moral integrity to expose the group of sexually deviant criminals at the heart of our nations powerhouse, it will be weighed up against the gargantuan task of pushing it all through the courts of justice, and then and ONLY then if they can be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that the sitting Judge/s in the cases is/are NOT THEMSELVES somehow involved or on the fringes of or have very close associates that are even loosely entangled with the mire of filth that is the Elephant In The Room with this case.

We must also remember that the higher one climbs in the Political and Judicial shares of this country and others, is how increasingly incestuous that layer of society is, through educational background, marriage and social circles. Six degrees of separation doesn't even come close. At this level it would be virtually impossible to find a Judge who has no connections whatsoever to the people or person brought before him.

Ocean Club guest lists, ambassadorial input from the outset, Murdoch, Freud, Gordon Brown, PACT and so on has all been drawn into this convoluted farce. And when one starts to negotiate the connections between all these people one realises that this is far more about making sure certain peoples horrendous perversions remain hidden than anything to do with justice for a single, solitary toddler. There is nothing about Madeleine per se that is anything different or more important than any other child anywhere in the world. A child dies every second in this world as a matter of fact, Madeleine is not and never has been any more worthy of time or attention than ANY of those children, she is merely one of billions of children, nothing more, nothing less.

Because of this simple and obvious fact, we can deduce that the REAL issue behind this case and the nonsensical way it has played out over the last 6 years as a complete distortion of the reality, is something much more dangerous.

I don't know if this has been discussed on another thread, but if it has, can admins remove this post to the appropriate thread?

Who is Robert Naylor, and what's so important about him?  


 @Justmuddling Just Me
[url=javascript:;][/url] [url=javascript:;][/url] [url=javascript:;][/url] 5m

• 
  

RT @kikoratton: (1/2) Why did #McCann never admit to friendship with#RobertNaylor? Because of this http://t.co/s9n4cFHpJf

Smokeandmirrors wrote:

Mirage wrote:

SchrodingersBody wrote:

flaxyard wrote:Good post. I too am utterly baffled why TM held this back and more importantly how this still seems not to have swayed opinions against TM. Surely SY are looking at this in a new light?

I don't think they need to look at things in a new light, I think they probably have a reasonable understanding of what happened, and who is responsible, but it all comes down to the old saying "knowing and proving are 2 different things". If you can't prove it, then they can't say it, especially when legal gags are likely to be used. 

Scotland Yard are in a position where they cannot realistically say anything other than please help us. That is until they can say, and prove exactly what happened, and either recover Madeleine or bring a case somewhere. The problem is that them saying please help us and very little else, fits with both them keeping quiet until they are in a position to prove something, but also fits with them being forced to apply another agenda that doesn't fit with fair and proper policing. I just hope it's the former, for the sake of the integrity of our country.

I simply cannot accept that there is not now a collated body of evidence sufficient to bring the McCanns to trial. A person was sentenced to a minimum of 36yrs on circumstantial and mobile phone evidence in my county. So it is tosh to me that all these strands, together with the dogs, together with the palpable lying by this pair that we have on miles of video footage, is not enough for the CPS to bring out the rubber stamp. Absolute tosh.

No, there is something else standing in the way of this going forward and I have a pretty shrewd idea what.

ETA SchrodingersBody, I am not directing the tosh bit at you, it's the set up I refer to.

I think that there are thousands of us that share this opinion.

It will all come down to "who is the mightiest political force in the UK at this time". By this I mean, there are those clearly entangled in or political system at the highest levels, who have power and influence whose personal proclivities are DEEPLY criminal and depraved, hence the launch of operation Fernbridge. This is incontrovertible.

They also have political enemies, those in opposition, not merely to their abhorrent personal failings, but to their political position.

And the third "man" in this hideously twisted triangle is Public Interest. Someone somewhere will be wrangling with the whole sorry conundrum of how far this issue can be exposed. IF, and it is a big IF, someone somewhere has the gumption and moral integrity to expose the group of sexually deviant criminals at the heart of our nations powerhouse, it will be weighed up against the gargantuan task of pushing it all through the courts of justice, and then and ONLY then if they can be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that the sitting Judge/s in the cases is/are NOT THEMSELVES somehow involved or on the fringes of or have very close associates that are even loosely entangled with the mire of filth that is the Elephant In The Room with this case.

We must also remember that the higher one climbs in the Political and Judicial shares of this country and others, is how increasingly incestuous that layer of society is, through educational background, marriage and social circles. Six degrees of separation doesn't even come close. At this level it would be virtually impossible to find a Judge who has no connections whatsoever to the people or person brought before him.

Ocean Club guest lists, ambassadorial input from the outset, Murdoch, Freud, Gordon Brown, PACT and so on has all been drawn into this convoluted farce. And when one starts to negotiate the connections between all these people one realises that this is far more about making sure certain peoples horrendous perversions remain hidden than anything to do with justice for a single, solitary toddler. There is nothing about Madeleine per se that is anything different or more important than any other child anywhere in the world. A child dies every second in this world as a matter of fact, Madeleine is not and never has been any more worthy of time or attention than ANY of those children, she is merely one of billions of children, nothing more, nothing less.

Because of this simple and obvious fact, we can deduce that the REAL issue behind this case and the nonsensical way it has played out over the last 6 years as a complete distortion of the reality, is something much more dangerous.

Phenomenal post.

Yesterday I was in the Slough of Despond about the situation you have so eloquently described. Some days I try to rekindle hope that somewhere, somehow a hero will read all we write here and will want to escape the detritus through which they are forced to swim each day in their place of work and feel clean and decent and human again.

It will come down in the end to a battle within individual consciences, I have no doubt. After all, who wants their own child to grow up in a society that can harm them? Who wants to know they have endangered their own child through moral collapse

 So there are individuals going through the motions of democratic procedures in this country every day who are ill-at-ease in their souls. "Cogs" are keeping schtum through fear and coercion, threat and implied threat. This is Stasi territory. It will only be broken down and the putrefaction exposed if they find the guts to speak up. They know there are thousands upon thousands of people who would extol them and admire them and support them. We all smell the stench.

 Who is going to leave this world a better place for children? Or who is going to sentence their children or the children of others to the threat of unspeakable perversion? - I put it to you, the reader, who stops by.

For what is life, if not to develop the inner man and nurture the soul? To kindle what is good and wholesome? To leave something good of yourself to live on in the world after you?

I think we share a like-mind Mirage. Who indeed will foster what is worthy and root out the ills in society? I think many of us are awakening to the sad and frightening truth that very few people actually care about the legacy we as a society will leave future generations. Certainly politicians are merely interested in short term objectives for controlling 65,000,000 individuals, just long enough until they retire, make a couple of million on the after-dinner circuit to then vanish off to some pile in the country where they can live out their dotage. What comes after that is not on their radar. They will have the means to protect themselves and to hell with everyone else.