Game over?
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 21 of 25 • Share
Page 21 of 25 • 1 ... 12 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
Re: Game over?
I cannot help but agree, HelenMeg.HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
Guest- Guest
Re: Game over?
Then why did David Cameron agree to a review in the first place when he could have just said no?
The Home Secretary has previous form for denying the McCanns a review so why let it go ahead if the protection of VIP's is paramount.
It doesn't make sense to me and it has cost the taxpayer a fortune.
The Home Secretary has previous form for denying the McCanns a review so why let it go ahead if the protection of VIP's is paramount.
It doesn't make sense to me and it has cost the taxpayer a fortune.
Casey5- Posts : 348
Activity : 402
Likes received : 52
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Game over?
Pressure and threats from Rebekah Brooks to reveal unsavoury headlines for a week, which makes me wonder what Brooks wanted revealing. Pro-whitewash or truthseeker Brooks?Casey5 wrote:Then why did David Cameron agree to a review in the first place when he could have just said no?
The Home Secretary has previous form for denying the McCanns a review so why let it go ahead if the protection of VIP's is paramount.
It doesn't make sense to me and it has cost the taxpayer a fortune.
Plus Cameron knows he can control the outputs of an investigation by giving very clear guidelines to the Met as to their remit. A whitewash could have serious benefits to any cover-up, of course.
But then, those pesky Portuguese decided to re-open the case at their end too, and it's all gone Pete Tong, with the primary aim of the Brits now to muscle in on the PJ investigation. NOT bargained for by the establishment and explains Cameron's new presence in the wings?
Guest- Guest
Re: Game over?
But then, those pesky Portuguese decided to re-open the case at their end too, and it's all gone Pete Tong,
----------------------------------------------------
And then, those pesky Portuguese 're-shelve' their current 'investigation' and release all those lovely 'files' when DCI Redwood was on 'good terms' with the PJ at the beginning when the Met's review turned into 'investigation'
Luvvly Jubbly!
----------------------------------------------------
And then, those pesky Portuguese 're-shelve' their current 'investigation' and release all those lovely 'files' when DCI Redwood was on 'good terms' with the PJ at the beginning when the Met's review turned into 'investigation'
Luvvly Jubbly!
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: Game over?
If it were that the Macs had some dirt on members of the former Brown gvt, then one can only assume Cameron would have jumped for joy and indeed taken the chance to reveal all, to the benefit of his own crew. Instead, we seem to have Cameron on standby waiting, in an unprecedented way, to referee and direct procedings. This suggests to me that he has some interest in this whole matter beyond his commonality with the Macs as a 'parent who has lost a child'. Cameron has not been so forthcoming with his spare pots of money for other causes and one is bound to ask why he is so keen to assist the Macs shovel their particular pile of droppings when the rest of us mere mortals just have to shovel our respective own daily. He wasn't in Praia de Luz that week, by any chance was he?Casey5 wrote:Then why did David Cameron agree to a review in the first place when he could have just said no?
The Home Secretary has previous form for denying the McCanns a review so why let it go ahead if the protection of VIP's is paramount.
It doesn't make sense to me and it has cost the taxpayer a fortune.
Guest- Guest
Re: Game over?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2592741/Gun-fired-shot-killing-Jill-Dando-used-Liverpool-gangland-shooting-years-later-mystery-former-police-officer-claims.html
--------------------------
Don't know where to 'post' this.
ANOTHER 'COVER UP'?
DID THE MET 'KNOW' ABOUT THIS?
He added Merseyside Police identified a potential link between Dando's murder and a convicted drugs baron from Liverpool.
He claimed that during a series of complex operations during 2004 an undercover officer infiltrated the gang and recorded conversations with other members, in which her name was mentioned.
But George left to rot until 2008, because Campbell 'had ALREADY got his 'dastardly JD killer' man'?
Barry George was 'fitted up, framed, stitched up' by DCI Redwood's, until recently, 'supervisor' DCS H. Campbell.
Imo, 'the apple never falls far from the tree'
So 'someone', alive or dead, had better watch out!
imo, obviously.
--------------------------
Don't know where to 'post' this.
ANOTHER 'COVER UP'?
DID THE MET 'KNOW' ABOUT THIS?
He added Merseyside Police identified a potential link between Dando's murder and a convicted drugs baron from Liverpool.
He claimed that during a series of complex operations during 2004 an undercover officer infiltrated the gang and recorded conversations with other members, in which her name was mentioned.
But George left to rot until 2008, because Campbell 'had ALREADY got his 'dastardly JD killer' man'?
Barry George was 'fitted up, framed, stitched up' by DCI Redwood's, until recently, 'supervisor' DCS H. Campbell.
Imo, 'the apple never falls far from the tree'
So 'someone', alive or dead, had better watch out!
imo, obviously.
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: Game over?
Today is mothering Sunday.. how come we haven't had/seen any pictures in the Sunday papers or the news channels of the saintly duo going to church to pray for their precious daughter. A few years ago we reports of the twins taking daffodils to the church for Kate,although i will never understand why they just could't have given her them at home. but there has been nothing, zilch,nada it seems the mccanns wanted to keep it all sooo very private this year,my my how times have changed from 2007 to 2014.
petunia- Posts : 520
Activity : 607
Likes received : 87
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Game over?
HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5. And as regards Casey5`s query on why DC would fritter tax payer`s money on a review/investigation is so that it can finally be put to bed (whitewashed of course like the Lord Stevens Enquiry into Diana`s death). I realise that if this was the case GM would have been bumped off ages ago but there are precautions GM could have taken against this. Anyway its the theory I favour at the moment and am open to challenge.
Woofer- Posts : 3390
Activity : 3508
Likes received : 14
Join date : 2012-02-06
Re: Game over?
Well, I think that members of Brown's government were asked for a favour by the VIP guests at OC, PdL. By covering up M's death, they were protecting themselves and their activities from being exposed in the media. Favours were pulled which Brown's government agreed to at the time. Remember, amngst other connections, PE was a nephew of M Hodge. DC has nothing to lose really but will come under intense pressure from certain individuals who will ask him not to allow SY to reveal the whole truth about what was going on. DC has nothing to lose by allowing SY to reveal the whole truth and will probably do well at next election by revealing the whole truth and exposing one and all. At the same time, things are never black and white and he will gain enemies by doing so. So he has to decide whether to just bring justice to the MC canns + Tapas 7 or to the wider circle implicated in the cover up. Mc Canns will have needed assistance possibly from Ex pats to conceal body etc. This is the theory, anyway.MILLIE wrote:If it were that the Macs had some dirt on members of the former Brown gvt, then one can only assume Cameron would have jumped for joy and indeed taken the chance to reveal all, to the benefit of his own crew. Instead, we seem to have Cameron on standby waiting, in an unprecedented way, to referee and direct procedings. This suggests to me that he has some interest in this whole matter beyond his commonality with the Macs as a 'parent who has lost a child'. Cameron has not been so forthcoming with his spare pots of money for other causes and one is bound to ask why he is so keen to assist the Macs shovel their particular pile of droppings when the rest of us mere mortals just have to shovel our respective own daily. He wasn't in Praia de Luz that week, by any chance was he?Casey5 wrote:Then why did David Cameron agree to a review in the first place when he could have just said no?
The Home Secretary has previous form for denying the McCanns a review so why let it go ahead if the protection of VIP's is paramount.
It doesn't make sense to me and it has cost the taxpayer a fortune.
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
Wow Woofer - that's a helluva theory!Woofer wrote:HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5. And as regards Casey5`s query on why DC would fritter tax payer`s money on a review/investigation is so that it can finally be put to bed (whitewashed of course like the Lord Stevens Enquiry into Diana`s death). I realise that if this was the case GM would have been bumped off ages ago but there are precautions GM could have taken against this. Anyway its the theory I favour at the moment and am open to challenge.
I do think there were some big investment opportunities in the Algarve ( re Vigia Group / golf resorts etc). All the guests that week seemed to be pretty well off and well paid. High earners, affluent, status-driven people. Not your average families.
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
***Woofer wrote:
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5.
You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
ETA not that I am against a theory that Diana, princess of Wales was wooshed out of a "situation"
Guest- Guest
Re: Game over?
Châtelaine wrote:***Woofer wrote:
You could be right HM, but the most plausible reason for cover up I`ve come across so far is that GM has proof that Princess Diana was murdered by MI5.
You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
Indeed he is! Most amusing post really. Serves as a useful reminder too showing how easy it is for informed speculation to veer off into the absurd. Of course as the recent textusa article tells us, sometimes it's hard to distinguish between woofer's irony and another poster's "stink bomb" (a so-truth-is-not-known diversionary tactic).
Bishop Brennan- Posts : 695
Activity : 920
Likes received : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Re: Game over?
Dee Coy wrote:I cannot help but agree, HelenMeg.HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities. They cannot keep their story straight even though their lives depend on it so would you really sit there wringing your hands and hoping that they don't start blabbing?
The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins.
Guest- Guest
Re: Game over?
I dont really understand what you mean. You dont have to trust G and K - if they talk they will be in jail.Poe wrote:Dee Coy wrote:I cannot help but agree, HelenMeg.HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities. They cannot keep their story straight even though their lives depend on it so would you really sit there wringing your hands and hoping that they don't start blabbing?
The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins.
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
Poe, great post, you are correct in my opinion. The McCanns are not the keepers of some privileged information. Their infamy can be credited to the press alone who saw the opportunity to make profit from the story and were not prevented from doing so. McCann is a fool drunk with his own self importance, raising legal actions to buffer lies and raise money. The prick thought it was such an easy game to play after the news papers made an out of court settlement and thereafter went on a spree.
May I ask your opinion on Redwoods recent explosive comment regarding the not being alive prior to disappearing. I do hope that the truth will out soon.
May I ask your opinion on Redwoods recent explosive comment regarding the not being alive prior to disappearing. I do hope that the truth will out soon.
____________________
F J Leghorn
"DOO-Dah! DOO-Dah-Day!"
The Rooster- Posts : 428
Activity : 524
Likes received : 94
Join date : 2011-04-12
Age : 77
Location : Virginia
Re: Game over?
There are two problems with this theory IMO:Poe wrote:If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities. They cannot keep their story straight even though their lives depend on it so would you really sit there wringing your hands and hoping that they don't start blabbing?
The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins.
1) The connections that the McCanns have with the establishment (whatever they are) are purely that; connections. They themselves are not part of it. Their connections will be able to pull some levers but not bring the full might of the state to bear.
2) The UK authorities have never been in complete control of things - the PJ exist and have an active interest, and now have an ongoing investigation of their own. Diplomatic pressure certainly derailed the original investigation to an extent but then something happened that no-one had foreseen - all the documents were published. Had they not been I doubt we'd be talking about this now and the McCanns would be home and dry without any need to use the dark arts that you suggest. The problem for the authorities now is how to get the genie back into the bottle
AndyB- Posts : 692
Activity : 724
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 60
Location : Consett, County Durham
Re: Game over?
Just a thought here. With some pretty extreme speculation (i.e. GM being privileged to information proving that M15 killed Diana!) can I suggest a moment of 'Occam's Razor?'. A far more likely explanation for a relatively clandestine meeting of a large group of well-paid doctors in a particular resort would be a 'jolly' paid for by one of the big pharmaceuticals. It's pretty common knowledge that this goes on (I have a relative who was paid / bribed in exactly such a way). An accidental child death in the middle of such an event might explain a rush to cover tracks by the co.
Has anyone explored such an angle? Given the brother of GM link (albeit earlier) to Astra Zenica?
Has anyone explored such an angle? Given the brother of GM link (albeit earlier) to Astra Zenica?
____________________
The prime suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann cannot be permitted to dictate what can and can't be discussed about the case
ProfessorPPlum- Posts : 414
Activity : 425
Likes received : 5
Join date : 2012-05-04
Re: Game over?
This has been suggested by quite a few. I know quite a lot about such conferences and they are generally staged at venues which are 5 star with great conference facilities. This particular complex, OC, was very mediocre accommodation with a lack of conference facilities. Not the place for a pharmaceutical event. These companies pay an awful lot of money in creating a good time for their delegates. Apart from the fact that many guests at OC that week were not medics - but execs in other fields. Most definitely not a pharmaceutical type event. You can read plenty of reviews online of the facilities at OC - reviews from that time period - and they are often pretty poor - mediocre accommodation, internet at reception not working.. etcProfessorPPlum wrote:Just a thought here. With some pretty extreme speculation (i.e. GM being privileged to information proving that M15 killed Diana!) can I suggest a moment of 'Occam's Razor?'. A far more likely explanation for a relatively clandestine meeting of a large group of well-paid doctors in a particular resort would be a 'jolly' paid for by one of the big pharmaceuticals. It's pretty common knowledge that this goes on (I have a relative who was paid / bribed in exactly such a way). An accidental child death in the middle of such an event might explain a rush to cover tracks by the co.
Has anyone explored such an angle? Given the brother of GM link (albeit earlier) to Astra Zenica?
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
Great post, totally agree, no government could trust those two to keep their gobs shut about anything.Poe wrote:Dee Coy wrote:I cannot help but agree, HelenMeg.HelenMeg wrote:I dont think this is about the protection of two not very likeable doctors from Rothley - but more about the protection of the very important 'other' guests and their links to big establishment. That is why political courage will be needed. If the decision is made to cease the protection of certain high ranking individuals there will be no going back for DC. If he can get away with just punishing the Mc Canns he will have done a good job.Woofer wrote:@ Cristobel - "I just don't see 37 homicide officers putting their careers and reputations on the line for a couple of not very likeable doctors from Leicester."
But would they do it for Queen and country or for Prince and country? IMO there has to be someone very high profile behind all this. And .... coppers are known for their `establishment mentality`, I doubt there`s many coppers that would balk against the status quo - what say you PeterMac?
If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities. They cannot keep their story straight even though their lives depend on it so would you really sit there wringing your hands and hoping that they don't start blabbing?
The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins.
Cristobell- Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12
Re: Game over?
I am wondering if people may be forgetting that there was something so serious surrounding this case that, within less than 72 hours of the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom ordered the Director of his 40-strong Media Monitoring Unit, Clarence Mitchell, to deal with public relations for the McCanns - and that, 7 years later, he is still in that role and is now a Parliamentary candidate for the ruling political party (Conservative)?Cristobell wrote:Great post, totally agree, no government could trust those two to keep their gobs shut about anything.Poe wrote:If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities...The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins
Are we losing sight of the facts that this man:
* boasted that his job was, quote, 'to control what comes out in the media'?
* spoke almost daily to his numerous media and press contacts throughout 2007 & 2008 and much of 2009?
* as soon as he ceased to work for the McCanns full-time, was employed directly by Rupert Murdoch's son-in-law?
* was later employed by Britain's current Prime Minister and ex-NOTW boss Andy Coulson as Deputy Director of Communications for the Conservative Party to help them win the 2010 General Election?
To that we need to add that Rupert Murdoch's CEO, Rebekah Brooks, forced the British Prime Minister to set up the £8 million-and-rising Operation Grange.
Might we also be forgetting the people who are benefitting in one way or another from the Madeleine McCann mystery?
* Rupert Murdoch's press and media empire?
* the innemerable media and press that have made millions by featuring the latest twists and turns in the mystery?
* those behind the 'Hacked Off' campaign who want to end freedom of the press?
* organisations for msiing and abducted people like 'Missing People' and 'Amber Alert' which have profited hugely from coverage of Madeleine's abduction?
Could we also be losing sight of:
* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls with Dr Gerald McCann on his mobile 'phone in May 2007?
* Gordon Brown's 'phone calls in May 2007 begging the Portuguese authorities to release the description of 'Tannerman'?
* Gordon Brown's visits to the FSS in Birmingham Leicestershire Constabulary (September 2007)?
* Gordon Brown being 'phoned about Dr Goncalo Amaral's removal from his post even before Amaral himself was informed?
* Gordon Brown's conversations with Jose Socrates, Portuguese Prime Minister, in October 2007 about Madeleine McCann?
* The Home Office's obstruction of the Rogatory Letters?
* Leicestershire Police's delay of nearly 6 months in forwarding the statements of Drs Katarina and Arul Gaspar to the Portuguese Police?
Many people continue to benefit from and have an interest in the maintenance of the 'Madeleine McCann Mystery'
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: Game over?
I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"
AndyB- Posts : 692
Activity : 724
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 60
Location : Consett, County Durham
Re: Game over?
AndyB wrote:I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"
Exactly. And who was the first person to contact Gordon Brown and draw his IMMEDIATE attention and intervention? What could it have been about this EXACT group of individuals that drew such immediate and direct intervention? If we knew who PRECISELY set that ball rolling I think the answer to the whole saga would be clear.
____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors- Posts : 2458
Activity : 2685
Likes received : 25
Join date : 2011-07-31
Re: Game over?
I guess every time Madeleine's face appears on the tabloid cover - it probably increases sales by more than a hefty amount.AndyB wrote:I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"
CM is a mystery- he has to be more than he seems.Very useful man, but why? If he were that good / influential he wouldn't be a spokesperson for Mc Canns. He seems to be full of self-importance yet to me he always will be simply a buffoon.
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
Yes.Smokeandmirrors wrote:AndyB wrote:I don't think anyone is forgetting any of that. I think the discussion is more about "why?"
Exactly. And who was the first person to contact Gordon Brown and draw his IMMEDIATE attention and intervention? What could it have been about this EXACT group of individuals that drew such immediate and direct intervention? If we knew who PRECISELY set that ball rolling I think the answer to the whole saga would be clear.
Just for a moment, consider that PE made that call to his Aunt MH. Other than him, who else had connections? For sure, it will be someone we've never heard of..........
HelenMeg- Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08
Re: Game over?
You have probably hit the nail on teh head there Andy, the release of the police files must have derailed everything, not least they supported the theory in Goncalo Amaral's book Truth of the Lie - and I recommend anyone new to this case or simply exploring to read GA's book - it is a quick, easy read, or watch the documentary.AndyB wrote:There are two problems with this theory IMO:Poe wrote:If this were to protect someone very high profile, we should never have even heard of Madeleine McCann. The whole situation should have been shut down and cleaned up without us ever hearing a peep about it.
However, if K&G set the media ball rolling before "help" was called in, when they got back to Rothley they should have been told, "We saved your necks. Now you fade away. Keep your heads down and keep quiet." Slap an injunction on them to stop them speaking publicly, issue a D notice or super-injunction to the media and the McCanns effectively disappear.
If you were in a position of power, why would you trust two unlikeable doctors from Rothley to keep their mouths shut? They are massive liabilities. They cannot keep their story straight even though their lives depend on it so would you really sit there wringing your hands and hoping that they don't start blabbing?
The government have much more effective ways of removing potential problems - heart attack, suicide, murder-suicide or unfortunate accident then seal the records for 100 years to protect the twins.
1) The connections that the McCanns have with the establishment (whatever they are) are purely that; connections. They themselves are not part of it. Their connections will be able to pull some levers but not bring the full might of the state to bear.
2) The UK authorities have never been in complete control of things - the PJ exist and have an active interest, and now have an ongoing investigation of their own. Diplomatic pressure certainly derailed the original investigation to an extent but then something happened that no-one had foreseen - all the documents were published. Had they not been I doubt we'd be talking about this now and the McCanns would be home and dry without any need to use the dark arts that you suggest. The problem for the authorities now is how to get the genie back into the bottle
Cristobell- Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12
Page 21 of 25 • 1 ... 12 ... 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25
Similar topics
» Goncalo Has Lost the Libel trial
» McCanns "frustrated" by lack of joint inquiry
» What Next For Madeleine Search? - Martin Brunt
» Discrepancy Video #3 - Crying Episodes
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
» McCanns "frustrated" by lack of joint inquiry
» What Next For Madeleine Search? - Martin Brunt
» Discrepancy Video #3 - Crying Episodes
» LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: British Police / Government Interference :: 'Operation Grange' set up by ex-Prime Minister David Cameron
Page 21 of 25
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum