Keir Simmons who has no balls at all

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/2010/11/we-just-hate-but-they-know.html

Keir Simmons has never claimed to have a jot of interest to what became of Madeleine Beth, for this he cannot be faulted. Keir Simmons must have spoken with David Jones because he too was in PDL from the beginning following this alleged abduction.. If David told Keir his thoughts about the McCanns (he thought they were involved) then Keir I would imagine at this time  must have also discussed the broken/shutter window that never was. Jones said by looking at the street and the apartment, it was impossible for a child to be abducted the way the McCanns claim.

Keir Simmons when you grow up, if you ever do, maybe some day,  you could do a little bit of investigative journalism( if you still rememeber what that means) and pay a visit to Dr.Katerina Gaspar..I read your claim on twitter ' the McCanns do not stop you asking the all important questions' really Keir is that so? you surely jest. You claim to be close to the McCanns because they are innocent, Clarence Mitchell said the very same thing when his wife lost their baby. Clarence, did not do as any normal father would, return to be with his wife.... no  Clarence stayed in PDL and cried into the arms of Kate McCann, it was at this point he said ' I knew she was innocent'. Does this mean before he cried into the arms of Kate McCann, he thought she was guilty? But then as David, Keir and Steve Boggan all know , they have been bought, they must no longer use the grey matter between their ears to think.  To a 'bought reporter',  what is the life of a three year old child,? it is not their child, she matters not.

The British public have the right to know about the Gaspar statement and one day someone will find a way to make sure it happens...and it won't be thanks to the likes of the disgraced 'ballless boys' mentioned above.

The McCanns have got away with this crime including that of fraud and will continue to do so unless we can sway public opinion. We have 'that power' in our hands all we have to do is show the Gaspar statement and the wind of change will follow. Not only will it bring down the McCanns but the Tapas 7 just might start to talk......David Payne is not going to want his reputation tarnished...he will think 'only' of himself... I read on the McCannfiles he and Fiona had to fill out a questionaire? where is it? in PJs secret files, if so why?

BBC East Midlands Inside out covers The Madeleine Foundation on 22nd November UPDATE

Posted: 16/11/2010 by HLM in The Madeleine Foundation

2

Nice to see the BBC retaining their biased stance. This comes as no surprise.

Next on:

Monday, 19:30 on BBC One (East Midlands only)

What happened to Madeleine McCann remains a mystery. Her parents were cleared of playing any role in her disappearance, but a controversial group continues to campaign in support of a discredited detective who claims Kate and Gerry McCann covered up the truth.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00w7768

Note – The McCanns have never been cleared of wrong doing.  Like Robert Murat, their arguido status was lifted and the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance was shelved pending further information coming to light.  The Madeleine Foundation campaigns for justice for Madeleine McCann.  My understanding is that The Madeleine Foundation largely considers Amaral’s thesis to be accurate; this is why they demonstrate support for him.
UPDATE -
Transmission confirmed for Monday November 22nd – 7.30pm, BBC One (in the East Midlands), Sky Channel 980 anywhere else in the country. Estimated transmission time: 12 to 13 minutes.
Whatever happens on Monday, one needs to consider that 3 years ago a transmission about a group questioning the McCanns account of abduction would never have been aired. Further, the programme will result in many people wanting to know more about the foundation.  A simple google of The Madeleine Foundation will take individuals to the their website.  Once there, they will be able to read a great number of articles that seriously consider not only the McCanns account, but the roles of Brian Kennedy, Clarence Mitchell, a long line of ineffective PI’s and government responses to the events surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Visit The Madeleine Foundation’s website http://www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk/
And now a word from The Madeleine Foundation’s Tony Bennett -

The interest of Simon Hare of BBC TV East Midlands in making a programme about The Madeleine Foundation was mentioned in a newsletter we made public early this year. The possible making of a programme has been discussed on and off on some of the ‘pro-McCann’ forums since then. There was a further bout of discussion about it on some of the ‘pro-McCann’ sites after we released picutures of our visit to Downing Street on Goncalo Amaral Day, one of which showed a BBC camerman filming us handing in our letter.

I have been interviewed on camera for the programme as has our former Chairman Grenville Green, Helene Davies-Green and other members of The Madeleine Foundation. 

The BBC has sole editorial control over what is shown in the film. We do not know what is in the final ‘cut’. We do know for certain that the journalist who produced this programme has spoken to Ms Butler. Whether there will be any footage or mention of her in the final ‘cut’ we do not know. The BBC is aware that Ms Butler made a false allegation of fraud within The Madeleine Foundation and that our bank has restored our frozen funds to us after Ms Butler’s allegations were shown to be false by Essex Police.


---------------------


COMMENT: It is very hard for us  to swallow,  but because the McCanns have not been charged they 'still are'in the eyes of the law 'innocent', the only reason they can continue this circus. Someone , somehow has to get the Gaspar statement into the British press, until such time the McCanns will remain above the law.

'Madeleine' to be etched in Stone by her parents

A brave decision?

It is good news that the McCanns are going to write a book.

If the parents wish to earn money to search for the child, what harm can it do? No, it won’t assist the search, we all know that: three and a half years have shown that any private investigators  with a bit of nous familiarise themselves with the evidence, note where it’s pointing and either turn the job down or ruthlessly exploit the parent’s vulnerabilities. The others, the lowly ex-cops who are willing to accept the way the wind blows from Camp McCann, have found nothing. So it will continue.

They are going to find it very tough indeed to write, but that’s their problem, not ours. At the end of it, after the serializations which, like their version of the archiving report, will be the spin, not the reality, we, and the reviewers, will have their book before us, the words fixed for ever.

The blog specifically avoided the whole question of truthfulness, for “operational reasons” and the needs of judicial secrecy; the introduction of spokespeople guaranteed that they could not be held to account for their words because spokespeople are always “deniable”; the interviews they have given, all rigidly structured beforehand, tell us literally nothing except about their demeanour.

Now they will be heard in their own words and it is Mission Impossible. Every sentence will be picked over within weeks to compare it with the police evidence, from both Portugal and Leicester, and with the court record from Lisbon. For the first time any untruths they tell will be on record -  not “misunderstood” or  “out of context” - and admissible in court. And what they leave out will be as significant as what they put in.

The McCanns still mean money. The decline in their personal value results from them having nothing new or interesting to say, only tired repetition, giving the media nothing to spin a new story round. But the readership for descriptions of the case from beyond the parents’ ambit remains potentially huge.

Thus it won’t just be internet critics doing the picking over. The book finally offers a killer  opportunity  for agents, writers and publishers, for there is all the difference in the (libel) world between introducing a controversial theory about living people,  such as Goncalo Amaral’s interpretation of the facts, and responding to  untrue written claims.

Without claims, and plenty of them, the book can’t sell. And the number of true claims made by the parents in the past is pretty limited, isn’t it? So it’s a brave decision.

Or is it?

For there is something about their decision-taking over recent months that makes one pause. They are acting, well, weirdly.

The shrill and excessively unwise criticisms of the government and particularly the extremely level-headed Theresa May; the curious muffled goings-on at the fund, prefigured by a Kate McCann blog entry; their chest-puffing support for the child-sex obsessed misfit Gamble and his thwarted empire-building; and then the strange folie de grandeur note of hurt surprise that their pronouncements haven’t been acted upon, as though they have lost touch with what is actually possible.

Their supporters, in the media and elsewhere, greet their initiatives with applause but also mild bewilderment, as if the parents’ aims, once so apparently straightforward, have become private and unpredictable. The pursuit of Amaral looks increasingly obsessive, as well as doomed, and the fund raising – brazen, now, in a way it hasn’t been since August 2007 – of which the book forms a part, appears more and more to be an end in itself.

The words “unstable” and “reckless” spring to mind. Three and a half years in the sinister and  murky limbo which they have chosen to inhabit is a long time, enough to weaken anyone’s grasp on reality. Others – their critics, the lawyers, the conmen, the whole mad gallery which surrounds them - can turn away from the case at any time but for the parents there is no escape. And more and more they want to get at “what else is in the police files”. “Support” - synthesised by the media monster – remains; privately they are frighteningly alone.

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/2010/11/brave-decision.html

The Smarts had their own Gaspar statement

The Smarts have made sure the alleged abduction of Elizabeth's trial remains in Utah, why, because it is there where Ed Smart has his strength , his power and the mighty support of the Mormon Church.

Before Elizabeth, ranaway, a scandal was about to break. A newspaper called The Enquirer dared to print a story that no one else would touch. The same way we long  to find a newspaper with balls large enough,  to print the Gaspar statement.

During the Elizabeth Smart investigation, the National Enquirer printed a story with the following headline: “Utah Cops: Secret Diary Exposes Family Sex Ring,” and alleged that the three Smart brothers “Ed, Tom, and David were involved in homosexual activity that their wives knew about”

The National Enquirer is known for its absurd stories that the general public don’t question as being completely false advertising. However, residents of Salt Lake were so upset by the story that they turned editions around or had stores pull them from the stands. In addition, after Elizabeth was found the Smarts threatened to sue the National Enquirer if it didn’t retract its statement, which it then did.

 Even though male homosexuality would have had nothing to do with the disappearance of a daughter or niece, for the Smart brothers to be part of a sex ring would discredit not only their position in the Mormon faith but would somehow discredit their innocence in the face of Smart’s kidnapping—The thought of aberrant sexuality, in any form, points to the perceived savagery in human nature and the fine line between Us and Other.

----------------------------------

However, residents of Salt Lake were so upset by the story that they turned editions around or had stores pull them from the stands.

 ..........discredit their innocence in the face of Smart’s kidnapping—The thought of aberrant sexuality, in any form, points to the perceived savagery in human nature and the fine line between Us and Other.

------------------------

This is why the McCanns cannot afford for the Gaspar statement to be out there , it matters not if it is true or false... as it states here....sexuality, in any form, points to the perceived savagery in human nature, it would also discredit the McCanns in their innocence in the face of Madeleines alleged kidnapping.

However, the Smarts asking for a retraction does not mean the story was not true. The Smarts themselves have never denied it and Tom when questioned said 'I do not know what my brothers have done to each other.'

McCanns no more 'The Darlings ' of the Media

I have been evaluating the peoples reaction of this latest stunt by the McCanns, Monday April 28th 2008, the parents announced they were going to write a million pound best seller., for the very same reason they give today, the fund is running dry. The book was to be be called 'Our year of hell' not Madeleines year of hell, but their's, not sure what happened to the book, shelved maybe, (no pun intended).

Today , while it is true ,every newspaper has mentioned the parents and their book, without a thought for Dr.Amarals (the parents do not want that out there). The McCanns no longer make headline news, they are way down the tabloids, tucked almost out of sight, an embarrassement. Two weeks ago it was their new German website, the petition and the begging bowl, from the now, (if reading the comments sections are anything to go by)  not so gullible public, seem to have wisened up and lets face it ,the McCanns are not liked, they have always had an air of snootiness about them, cold and hard.  Kate, even when she tried , could not give out any vibes she had a clue what it meant to be a mother, not her fault, she is like her own mother. Susan Healy,  also comes across as cold and distant, neither seem to have a maternal bone between them. Gerry likes to think of himself as a politician, he loves to hear the sound of his own voice and is unaware everyone is so very,very bored with him, yet on and on he drones in complete oblivion.

The boring McCanns, what will they do  next week to keep themselves in the news, a movie deal ?and who will play the part of unlikeable Kate and boring Gerry ? the stars will be lining up and the chosen two names kept secret, Clarence Mitchell will inform the press as we giggle behind our keyboards. The McCanns trying to come to terms, must struggle with reality as they find their celeb status is no more  .  The McCanns , well past their sell by date should really go back to Portugal and ask for the case to be re-opened but they won't  because they cannot, and they cannot for the simply reason they know exactly what happened to Madeleine and the 'situation she now finds herself in'

Here is an article from 2007, when Kate McCann was finger pointing along with her friends to put Robert Murat in the frame. May 2007 when the McCanns could do no wrong but inside they were as rotten as a decaying cabbage, we were just too blind to see it, or at least I was.

Trial by innuendo of the worst kind

Camilla Cavendish. 17 May 2007

The media are not helping the McCanns

My friend Lil is about to take her children on holiday to Madeira. “But I won’t be able to stop thinking about . . . you know” she says sheepishly. “I should think we’ll be eating with them in the restaurant every night”. I’m sure that many parents are feeling the same. The long, dread wait for news of Madeleine McCann has gripped us for almost two weeks. But that has become a problem.

This girl’s looks, her middle-class origins, her parents’ fear and frustration, having to deal with authorities in another language, make so many people feel that “it could have been us”. But our very concern, our desire to know every detail, risks ruining yet more lives. For the press pack in Praia da Luz has turned the story all too rapidly into “it must be him”. Robert Murat’s face has featured in almost every news bulletin and paper for the past 48 hours. But it is not remotely clear that he had anything to do with it.

The earliest TV broadcasts claimed that Mr Murat had been “arrested”. Had this been true, some coverage was inevitable. The British press long ago ceased to have any respect for the Contempt of Court Act, which instructs journalists not to prejudice a fair trial. (It is astonishing that we have been allowed to get away with this.) But it soon turned out that Mr Murat had not been arrested. He was a “suspect”, but had not been charged. As the hours wore on, it became glaringly apparent that there was precious little evidence against him.

That did not stop the bandwagon rolling. Not at all. We learnt yesterday that Mr Murat “was always on the bouncy castle” at work events. Must be a monster, then. Picture editors picked the oddest shots they could find, and proceeded to pronounce solemnly on how weird he looked – although he didn’t look weird to me, just harassed.

I began to feel as though I was watching Arthur Miller’s The Crucible when Lori Campbell of the Sunday Mirror was interviewed about why she had tipped off the police. “I found him to be creepy,” she said of Mr Murat. “When he was talking to me he was vague about his background.”

Ms Campbell may emerge as a heroine, a quick-witted journalist with a gut instinct for something the police had overlooked. Or she may not. She was absolutely right to tell police of her suspicions. But she was surely wrong to publicise them. Even if Mr Murat does turn out to be guilty, it does not help the investigation one jot for you and me to know his name right now. If he is innocent, he has been damaged for life. I think he meant it literally when he said that “the only way I will survive is if they catch Madeleine’s abductor”. In the twisted way of these things his denial, too, has become a story.

You can see how it has happened.

The public fascination is overwhelming. Madeleine has featured on the Today programme as often as in the redtop press. Her parents have asked for media coverage to keep up pressure on the authorities. And the Soham murders are still horribly fresh in journalists’ minds. Ian Huntley was a loner who hung around at the scene offering help to the press. So hardly anyone seems prepared to entertain the possibility that Mr Murat, as a bilingual neighbour, might have been sincere.

This is trial by innuendo of the worst kind. There was absolutely no reason to name this man; the Portuguese police still have not. The Times removed its photo of Mr Murat from the front page halfway through the night on Monday, replacing it with one of his mother’s front door, as editors agonised over whether there was a shred of evidence that he did it. But he remained on page three. The Daily Telegraph the next day chose to picture all three people who have been questioned by Portuguese police on its front page: Mr Murat, his alleged girlfriend and her estranged husband. Hey, they all knew each other. They were probably the same people who were seen together at a petrol station on the night of the abduction.

Wow, they must be guilty!

Differences between Britain and Portugal do not excuse the jump to conclusions. It is true that the Portuguese will seek more evidence before making an arrest than would be the case in Britain. But the Portuguese police have been ridiculed by a British press infuriated by their refusal to confirm or deny anything. Portuguese law forbids the police from making public any significant details of an investigation while inquiries are under way precisely in order to protect suspects from the kind of ordeal Mr Murat has suffered. It would be simply appalling if a judge was later to decide that he could not be tried.

It is not only because the story is abroad that the press feels uninhibited. Our treatment of Mr Murat echoes that of Tom Stephens, the first man to be named as a suspect by police investigating the murders of five women in Ipswich last year. He too had originally approached the press, which splashed the weirdest-looking pictures of him they could find. A week later a completely different man was charged with all five crimes.

There is another point. In cases of this type, if abductors fear capture, they panic and kill. We cannot know if the wanton press coverage is limiting the police’s chances of bringing Madeleine to safety. If any of the three people pictured in The Telegraph is guilty, he or she will now feel cornered. What then?

We all long for a happy ending. But our desire to be reassured that everything possible is being done should not take precedence over the truth. Mr and Mrs McCann seem to be holding their nerve a lot better than the British press. And they have much, much more at stake. Which is everything.

What matters is to find this poor girl, not to indulge in sensationalist speculation that could do untold harm

What kind of mother is Susan Healy?

Quote from Susan Healy

“I think, now, we have done all that and, somehow, there’s nothing to protect you and you are thinking constantly about Madeleine and her situation. And there’s a fear, I suppose, that people will accept that Madeleine has gone.”


Quote from Gerry McCann

'Madeleine and the situation she finds herself in'

Susan Healy knows her daughter is a liar but she stands by her for the simple reason she is her daughter. Madeleine was her first grandchild , you would think she would want Madeleine to have a place where she could visit and take flowers. Susan Healy is happy for her daughter to continue the lie for as long as it takes, we already know they have eighteen years in mind thanks to Jaycee.....maybe Madeleine will also return home with great grandchildren for Susan Healy, born from a rapist who has raped Madeleine since the age of three. Kate has said 'it is not a pleasant thought' but......yes Kate 'but', it is not going to happen is it ? thank God , Madeleine did not go through the hell of Jaycee. Susan Healy is at peace because she knows Madeleine is at peace and her daughter is not in prison which is her rightful place, so for Susan Healy all is right with the world. What kind of mother does that make her ? I have no idea, certainly not the kind of mother I would want.

Kate and Gerry Pinocchio

When you think they can sink no lower, they manage to shock the world. The McCanns have only ever wanted money and at last Kate McCann has spoken the truth, she is writing a novel for the money. Kate has no interest in laying the remains of her child to rest , her only desire, to become a celebrity and sign her name in a  book of lies to sell to the gullible few, who still believe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5rbRg5Beb4