Re: Latest interview with Dr Amaral - copied from Joana Morais - with thanks

by TheTruthWillOut 09.06.14 22:56

I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.

by fossey 09.06.14 22:59

stillsloppingout wrote:I am going to have to edit my post . its not a Gay footballer my bad typing and sentencing . and its 3 superinjunctions not D notices they are national security , this is just a footballer who has three times done stuff . but do not post any names . because this has derailed the thread . and i could be in trouble .

To the mods im sorry .

My fault SSO with my inquisitive nature and being a keen footballer fan.

Say no more and back on topic.

Can hazard a guess if it's classed as national security. Interesting.

by MissDaisy 09.06.14 23:03

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.

I think you are confused with super injunctions. Footballers do not have the authority to issue DA Notices, they are between Government departments and the media. They have a website here where they give details of DA notices that have been issued. http://www.dnotice.org.uk/records.htm

by Ochosi 09.06.14 23:06

Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

So why turn it into a criminal investigation - outside of their jurisdiction?
As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

by TheTruthWillOut 09.06.14 23:10

MissDaisy wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:I don't really care Fossey, honestly. I do care that the D-notice system is being abused by the rich/celebs/sports stars. Really pisses me off.

Edit: And superinjuctions shouldn't exist.
I think you are confused with super injunctions. Footballers do not have the authority to issue DA Notices, they are between Government departments and the media. They have a website here where they give details of DA notices that have been issued. http://www.dnotice.org.uk/records.htm

I edited my post MissDaisy. But my point stands. Both are abused IMO.

by Google.Gaspar.Statements 09.06.14 23:12

Monday, 9 June 2014
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

by fossey 09.06.14 23:15

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

They won't like you posting Blacksmith blogs on here GGS.

by Mirage 09.06.14 23:21

fossey wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.
They won't like you posting Blacksmith blogs on here GGS.

by j.rob 09.06.14 23:26

Ochosi wrote:Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

It's not a sodding PR exercise. it's a murder investigation. The main culprits are fairly obvious to many people.

An explanation as to 'where is all is' - I suppose that would be something to do with the fact that people who are involved in a crime want to avoid being accused of that crime?

Yes?

by roy rovers 09.06.14 23:27

Gordon Brown's intervention in the early days was badly misjudged. Then he was such a control freak that he called the PJ off to avoid being made to look like a pillock. By the time reality dawned and the British establishment / police understood the truth the British press and public had fallen in love with poor Maddie and the Crown Prosecution Service advised that the threshold of proof was going to be very high. That's what Andy Redwood is trying to get to - some decent proof but it's looking like he'll retire looking like a pillock too. All IMHO.

by Guest 09.06.14 23:28

Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one? winkwink

by elasticandy 09.06.14 23:33

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.

i agree with blacksmith

by Mirage 09.06.14 23:36

Dee Coy wrote:Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one?

Thanks Dee Coy. I've heard that said. Thing is, they should sort themselves out if that's the case. Either they are promulgating a common view or, if they're not, they should put their individual names to their articles. What are they men or mice?. "Confusion is good" is Gerry's specialty. I thought they were a serious outfit once upon a fairy tale. I hate fakes, I really do.

There seems a lunar aspect to their outbursts. I will go consult my almanac. dance

by Mirage 09.06.14 23:39

elasticandy wrote:
Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:

Monday, 9 June 2014
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The Train Moves On

Well, Goncalo Amaral's made his position absolutely clear in this latest interview, hasn't he? He's comfortable alongside Mr Tony Bennett, M/S Pat Brown and Joana Morais and perhaps he's right.

Unfortunately the little Bureau disagrees completely with everything he's said, there's no possibility of common ground and so we wish him luck and say goodbye to Goncalo.
i agree with blacksmith

Are you able to say why?

by Ochosi 09.06.14 23:43

j.rob – I don’t understand what you’re getting at. I’m referring to cover ups/high level involvement and the possible reasons for this. This was discussed earlier in the thread and the topic concerns Amaral’s latest interview, where he mentions the current digs etc being staged/a farce/ a movie. You’ve emboldened the bit of my post mentioning conspiracy, but haven’t elaborated.

Yes, the perpetrators seem pretty clear to me, too.

by CynicAl 09.06.14 23:50

MaybeMaybenot wrote:
CynicAl wrote:
tigger wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:Gonçalo Amaral: Yes, we will. When MI5 opens the case files, we will find out.
Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. On location.

Well Control Risks Group were on the ground soon after the disappearance and they consist of ex security service personel. So it wouldn't surprise me if the security service were doing their own thing without telling the PJ.

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

A private security firm has been secretly investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann for four months because her parents
feared that Portuguese police were failing properly to search for their daughter.

Iirc Dr. Amaral said it was the British (i think MI5) who pushed them to arrest Murat initially.
Clearly they wanted the case to be wound up quickly.
Might explain the sudden recollection of three of the T 9 that they'd seen him and explain a good deal more.

Is that in the files?

The files actually contain the information that the PJ's investigation was being badged and directed by a representative of MI5, who were naming their own 'prime suspects' and demanding their arbitrary arrest? Did the files mention what evidence was presented for MI5's insistence? Did the director of the PJ consider that his agency's mandate was to do whatever British Military Intelligence told him to do, and to throw an investigation in order to oblige?

Didn't someone also say that it was the British Police who first regarded the parent's as prime suspects?

So how many agencies were actually on the ground in Portugal directing the PJ?

I'm surprised at Amaral... He seems like a man who would tell British Military Intelligence to take a running jump and wait for due process.

Show me one video of anyone who stayed there in resort talking about a missing girl..Everyone must have been gagged....WHY?
This is a definite cover up...Absolutely sure of it

Interesting theory.

Why do you expect there to be lots of videos of anyone who was in the town at the same time talking about Maddie? How many videos exist of people who were in town at the same time as Ben Needham? Or in York at the same time as Claudia Lawrence? If this was today I'd expect every numb-brain wanting his fifteen minutes to have a video. Seven years ago? I hardly think everyone in town must have been gagged. Do you not think that journalists would have picked up on a gag? Why did Amaral not report a gag? Or was he in on it?

by utahagen 09.06.14 23:50

elasticandy wrote, "i agree with blacksmith"

In that case, elasticandy, PLEASE explain what Blacksmith was talking about in the particular column. He has ben optimistic the McCanns will be charged. Has he now changed his mind? Or does he still believe the McCanns will be charged and is dismissing those who do not believe that?

PLEASE tell me what you think Blacksmith means here!

by Guest 09.06.14 23:54

Mirage wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Mirage, I reckon there's several contributors within the Bureau. They often sign off with different initials and have varying writing styles. There's the hideously vitriolic Antony Sharples, the clever insightful one and the hilariously witty one. And the cynical one?

Thanks Dee Coy. I've heard that said. Thing is, they should sort themselves out if that's the case. Either they are promulgating a common view or, if they're not, they should put their individual names to their articles. What are they men or mice?. "Confusion is good" is Gerry's specialty. I thought they were a serious outfit once upon a fairy tale. I hate fakes, I really do.

There seems a lunar aspect to their outbursts. I will go consult my almanac.

Certainly lost a lot of credibility with today's offering. Reminds me a bit of when religions become so powerful they start believing the words of the self-aggrandizing men within them and forget what Jesus et al actually believed and preached. Or when the upwardly-mobile start to believe their own snobbish hype and deny the two-up two-down they were brought up in and don't invite their parents to their weddings.

by Okeydokey 09.06.14 23:55

Ochosi wrote:Late to the party and going back a few pages.... I find a lot of what CynicAl says sounds sensible.
As a high level conspiracy to cover up/whitewash - it looks like a mess to me.

I've thought before, that the Government (Brown/Blair) support for the McCanns was as a PR exercise for the Government and the Press have been toeing the line due to fear of litigation.

What I find difficult to understand, is the review that David Cameron requested. Okay, so we mainly accept Rebekah Brooks pressured him. I'm not sure I’m clear why she did and why he agreed, but I’m not going into those theories here.

Then the review turned into an investigation. I don't think it would have needed to do that for a whitewash/cover up to be possible.
Couldn't SY have said "we've reviewed the case files, consulted with the PJ, Leicestershire Police, x y and z who were involved in the original investigation and conclude that, though sadly, no answers have been found, due process was followed and we are reassured that the case isn't closed, but shelved and the PJ will reopen in the light of any new information, or as they have always stated, if the McCanns request this" ?

So why turn it into a criminal investigation - outside of their jurisdiction?
As a PR exercise, it seems to be a badly judged one and far more costly than initially anticipated. I believe a lot of politicians are ego maniacs, but to instigate an investigation which requires a conclusion that gives them some sort of kudos, seems a risky strategy. Which doesn't mean that isn't what's happening.

I can't work out a plausible explanation, as to why this case is where it is. I can think of explanations for various events – which all could be way off the mark - but not a concerted, all encompassing explanation which sees all parties (excl. PJ) acting to a common purpose.

I think you have to understand just how effective G McC is in this world of media and politics. It's not exactly a new phenomenon - some people are just very good at mass manipulation.

So, I think the reason the Met Police are conducting their inquiry in this way - rather than doing the sensible thing and starting with intensive re-interviewing of the Tapas 9 - is that there is political pressure on them to rubbish the PJ investigation under Amaral. The intention is to show that the original investigation was defective. That is enough for Team McCann. Their main objective is to prevent Amaral's book being published in the UK. That is the great bulwark that has to be defended.

by CynicAl 10.06.14 0:00

sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

by elasticandy 10.06.14 0:01

utahagen wrote:elasticandy wrote, "i agree with blacksmith"

In that case, elasticandy, PLEASE explain what Blacksmith was talking about in the particular column. He has ben optimistic the McCanns will be charged. Has he now changed his mind? Or does he still believe the McCanns will be charged and is dismissing those who do not believe that?

PLEASE tell me what you think Blacksmith means here!

hi - I guess im very suspicious of Mi5/SiS conspiracies - i suspect the mm disappearance is simpler but with little evidence to support a conviction. im not a blacksmith fan or any fan but on this i think he is right Mi5 would have buried this case years ago.

by Guest 10.06.14 0:03

Cynicalal have enjoyed your posts today. My feelings are quite similar.I personally don't feel that there is a cover up. I believe that SY and the PJ are working together.
Until I see a random person arrested/arguidoed, I'm.going to try to be positive.

by aiyoyo 10.06.14 0:07

It would appear the 'little bureau' is run by heartless 'little man' who abandoned comrades for his own aggrandisement.

Good luck to Amaral - yes.
Good bye - No

Good bye Bull Shit littleman !

ETA: GGS, he was binned earlier. We are not allowed recycled rubbish here.

by maebee 10.06.14 0:14

CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

Indeed. As the man himself said "We want to create information": http://www.mccannfiles.com/id306.html

GM: We want to create information that will lead to us helping find Madeleine.

I'm probably nitpicking here but apart from the "create" information. The word "helping" is unnecessary, imo. He should have said "will lead us to finding Madeleine.

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

I know we've all seen it a hundred times but this Mcvid tells it all about exaggerating the "abductor". From 7.00 questions from journo, who doesn't believe them. KM "I know, I found my daughter gone". (no emotion about her missing daughter, just defensive reaction to a dis-believing journo). I know more than you do" All about defending themselves. Why oh why has no journo followed up on this and asked KM to expand on what she knows more of.

by Okeydokey 10.06.14 0:28

CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

Very good analysis. I agree - it's far more about information control than about financial gain as some people like to suggest, though no doubt they'll never have to worry about the mortgage again.

Looking back I think there have been roughly four phases of information control:

1. Initial damage limitation. Planting various ideas e.g. break in, abduction, predator, "like dining in your garden", etc etc.
2. Active "on the offensive" - meet the Pope, public education, FBI, tour of European capitals, make contact with witnesses.
3. Passive - I think they hoped to gradually turn down the volume and disappear from public life.
4. Renewed defence - this has to do with Amaral's book and the need to ensure it never sees the light of day in the UK. I think we are still in that period and this is what the Met Police op is all about.

Just my personal impression.

by Guest 10.06.14 0:37

aiyoyo wrote:

It would appear the 'little bureau' is run by heartless 'little man' who abandoned comrades for his own aggrandisement.

Good luck to Amaral - yes.
Good bye - No

Good bye Bull Shit littleman !

ETA: GGS, he was binned earlier. We are not allowed recycled rubbish here.

AGREE 100%.

by perpendicular circus 10.06.14 0:41

maebee wrote:
CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

Indeed. As the man himself said "We want to create information": http://www.mccannfiles.com/id306.html

Wanting to know what people think, then trying to control it is the core of this case. CM was deployed for that reason , that was/is his role. Spreading complicity was GM's role and it worked, so far. Someone said earlier something that reminded me of the days when I used to frequent the Mirror forums, back in the day , and that was that Gerry was deflated and wanted out at some point, then the great strategy came about and he was in for it. .
Like Cynical Al and others I doubt the great conspiracies , I think this event hit a perfect time , a perfect unease and exploited it. All Blair and Brown wanted was to be part of the great populace wave they assumed was in support of the parents, they wanted to ride that wave, hence the deploying of CM. But he went "native" , he espied a good chance when he saw it , like all the other chancers who have come since , the PI's , the agencies, the great solvers to be.
Amaral has both overplayed and underplayed his hand here. Even today he refrains from using Mark Harrison's name .
The case against the parents was made by British cops assigned to the case , lent, whatever , such as Lee Rainbow , the profiler, Mark Harrison the body finder in chief and Martin Grimes and his dogs. Their role was known to forum afficianados and made clear after the wikileaks tape . Known by the diplomatic service , who advised a slight retraction of support . Know to Exton in his sub-contracted role for Halligen.
Then Redwood came into the game , because Cameron was pushed shoved whatever by Rebekkah Brooks . We don't know how diligent he intends or wants to be , how fixed or flexible is his thinking, but we do know he is relying heavily on Exton's reports. We know , from Exton that this report was critical of the parents and we know he suggested that Madeleine's bedtime wanderings might have played a part . What else did he consider? The man is no fool, he taped and had voice analysis of JT , did he do the same to the parents? Why did they suppress his report ?
All of this I knew, you knew, then Slopping out said something that gave me a jolt . He mentioned the wallet , the credit cards and cocaine . Now we tend to assume they had a grand plan , that is our error. They were thinking on their feet, hoping to get by day to day , at first. The wallet has bugged me for 7 years . I used to think cadaver scent . But of course they were concerned about their other misdemeanours . What did Gerry and Matt have in common, other than a tendency for constrained parenting , and a desire to have been professional footballers? What a great way to deliver drugs would be a person wandering around the town with a baby buggy. Why did Matt feel the need to wake up Jezz to tell him to go back to sleep , again? Why would SY want to be talking to drug suppliers ? And if you needed help in a town far from home and you had just bought or sold (another thought) some gear, how stongly could you pressurize your buyers into assistance and what would they be prepared to do ?

by Guest 10.06.14 0:42

CynicAl wrote:sallypelt

Good points. The fund, the actions of the Mc's don't even merely point to greed. They point to control. Everything about what they do is about controlling information. PR agents? Controlling information. Carter Ruck? Controlling information. A freaking call centre hotline in India? Controlling information. They want to know what anyone has on the case before they hear it from SY. They need to know first. No sign of "please help us... Call the police or Childline." Always 'call our operation.' Halligen, probably hired as a leak tester. Metodo3, hired as an illusion. They want to know what people think then try to control it.

So can you please answer the question posed by Hicks about Clarence Mitchell?

by utahagen 10.06.14 0:48

Aiyoyo wrote: "It would appear the 'little bureau' is run by heartless 'little man' who abandoned comrades for his own aggrandisement."

I still don't know what Blacksmith Bureau meant in his last post. Does he now no longer think the McCanns will be charged?

PLEASE someone explain this to me!

by Guest 10.06.14 1:17

Utahagen Imo he still believes the mc will be charged. He appears to think that Goncalo is treating the investigation as a cover up again now and not an investigation to find the real culprits.

That's my terrible interpretation anyway!