And then there were none

Madeleine McCann parents Kate and Gerry ‘warned by cops not to talk about missing daughter’ on 11th anniversary of disappearance - Sun

 

And so to Tracey  and that little piece in the Sun.

Groundling: [angrily] The great Blacksmith who accuses us of depending on newspaper stories and then quotes one!

 

Yes, yes, of course you’re right. Where were we?  

 

Ah, Tracey. After gradually gnawing away at the perimeter guards – Jane Tanner’s dark-skinned stranger abruptly banished from the face of the earth, JT herself now strictly incommunicado, location unknown, the rest of the Seven, now also unwilling to talk publicly about how Rong and Ridiculous Grange’s dismissal of their timeline is – you might wonder if Grange is leaving the parents a little isolated.

 

No, no, of course not. They are not suspects or persons of interest and have not a tea-stain on their characters. Still, their informal spokespeople, the famous Mr Friend and his chum Mr Pal, all otherwise known as Clarence Mitchell, tell us that  the parents have been banned by the Yard from publicly discussing the case, or “specifically advised not to” as Mr Pal describes it.  

So, as Grange enters its final stages, every one of the Tapas Nine has at last been silenced and  the horrific farce of the media being used to bypass or influence the normal legal route  – Expunge it! being the words of the then head of the McCanns’ criminal defence team for the policy –  has, it seems,  come to an end after ten years.

We shall see whether Mitchell thinks he can get round it. It will be tough because anything he says from now on about the case will mean either a) he is inventing things without authority from the parents or b) the parents are knowingly breaching the new requirements of the Yard. Since Mitchell is a mentally exhausted shell who has contributed nothing but his contact list to the team for at least three years he is unlikely to be up for the challenge.

But quite why Grange should be enforcing public silence on nine people who are accused of nothing and are not persons of interest is very strange. We're not even sure it's legal. So why have they all agreed to be bound?  They ought to go to the court of Human Rights.

 

Roll on Grange.

 

Eaten away

Well now, it gets better and better, doesn’t it?

But first to Science Corner. A long time  ago some people  we know spent a delightful  summer in the family villa on the Algarve and came back to England to find that their big chest freezer had broken down during their months away.  It took, presumably, a certain amount of courage to open the lid.

Over supper one of us asked how bad it had been.

“Horrific,” said the husband, who could see the funny side of it but clearly didn't like the memory,  “but it was also sort of weird.”

“Maggots? Stuff like that? Writhing?”

“No, no,” he said, “no maggots, no creepy crawlies. It’s just…” he struggled for the words, “…the food  had all disappeared except for this layer of a kind of sludge at the bottom. But climbing up from the sludge and along the sides were these sort of jungle  moulds unlike anything I’ve ever seen since, most of them huge – saucer sized – and in these extraordinary colours, sometimes vivid, sometimes a mixture of grey and pink, like dead flesh.”

“Jesus Christ.”

“It really was like stuff from outer space, like huge flowers but looking like they had an animal component, spreading out these repulsive tendrils from a sweaty core.” He paused and closed his eyes. "And along the underside of the lid by my hands."

“What did you do?”

“Do? I put the lid down again. It went that afternoon.”  

Funny, I hadn’t thought of that in years but something prompted  my memory the other day...vivid, a mixture of grey and pink, like dead flesh…huge flowers but an animal component…spreading out these repulsive tendrils from a sweaty core…climbing up out of the sludge...what was it?

 

 

Ah, yes

 

Definitely
 

 

And so it is

 

 

You poor,  hollowed out, totally  corrupted, creature

Just look at yourself

 

 

Not a Cigarette Paper Between Them

 

JB writes: I hadn't seen Richard D Hall’s 2008  comment in the Northern Echo that “there’s very strong evidence [my italics] we have been visited by a race from Zeta Reticuli, the small grey alien that comes from that star. There is evidence of other aliens from other stars, but less.” Well, that's all right then. Don't you love that detail about the "grey"?  

He adds that once people breach the wall of silence that governments impose on us and we find out what’s really going on, “…the world…could be unrecognisable. There could be solutions to the energy crisis. We could find out man’s true evolutionary path, how the universe works, why.” And, even more important, it seems, "we could find out why the pyramids were built." The  universe I can take or leave but finding out why the pyramids were built - wow!

Hall himself, apart from being clearly insane, is a person of the utmost insignificance, which is why we didn’t bother to mention him in our last post - but his huge reputation amongst the  leaders of the anti-McCann camp, the Usual Suspects, is another matter, and not one that is adding to their credibility.  

Hall’s belief there's “strong and compelling” evidence for alien infiltration removes any objective meaning at all from the word “evidence”: it is a perfect example of what we described yesterday as “masturbatory thinking” - thinking that tries to put  the contents  of one’s own imagination on exactly the same level as the real facts in the outside world. As such it is, of course, self-defeating: evidence, after all,  is, at root,  nothing  but a control mechanism to keep your imagination in line with the real world. Stop using it and you're in trouble, as Mr Hall and a number of the Usual Suspects demonstrate rather clearly. 

Kollerstrom: note the eyes - then look at his book titles

A couple of years ago I got cross at the only Hall internet piece I’ve ever seen, one featuring an academic acquaintance of Hall’s  being interviewed with the kind of fawning respect normally shown to the McCanns on Good Morning Britain, as well as a tour around Corpus Christi, the  academic’s old college, with faithful Hall lolloping at his heels like a dribbling but loyal spaniel.  

Only the academic, Nicholas Kollerstrom, wasn’t quite your average prof. And, as five minutes watching him with Hall demonstrated, he had a Holocaust hang-up and was using Hall to plug his latest book about it. So I expressed my disgust in the Bureau, adding that Hall, the Bennett disciple and associate, and his choice of guest  perfectly illustrated the moral depravity that hangs around his cesspit.  

I'd quite forgotten about it, though,  and didn't discover until yesterday, checking Hall's stuff on Google - it was like going backwards down a helter-skelter - that the Chief Pitleader himself had read the post back in 2015 and got all cross. I had written that “ [Hall’s] weasel words that he wasn’t supporting the book,  because he didn’t know whether it was true or not since he “wasn’t around” at the time of the Holocaust were laughably mendacious.”

I added:

“Didn't know whether it was true or not? Anyone with more than a primary education knows that the Holocaust details have been established with certainty… There are no mysteries about its execution, though there are plenty about the human behaviour behind it.

Yet Hall, like Bennett, has fired first and left the known  evidence for another time, or rather, again like Bennett, for never, and has put his plug out for an author who claims that the place where my stepfather’s large family was slaughtered, Auschwitz, wasn’t bad at all – why it had a swimming pool and a library for its lucky guests. And Harry’s family couldn’t really have been gassed since there weren’t any gas chambers there.

We’ve tried, unsuccessfully, on the Bureau to shame people into deserting sites like Havern’s ...” – the boring rest is on  https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11743-blacksmith-bureau-yet-another-untrue-and-bitter-attack-on-cmomm-tony-benentt-and-richard-d-hall

Outraged (from Norbury) Declaims

Mr Bennett didn’t like those views at all, mincing to the very edge of the Pit and crying down at his  disciples  in that strange, weirdly unmistakeable  tone of his – part hysterically outraged vicar, part whorehouse doorman dwarf  with a permanent erection  – that he would “expect all members here to repudiate them with the full degree of contempt that they deserve. And perhaps some might now agree with me that Blacksmith has never been a true McCann-sceptic.”

Goodness me! Proscribed!  

He then went off on one, as usual, as can be seen on the link above. Shortly afterwards he gave, with a lofty dignity reminiscent of Judge Tugendhat, his judgement: “Blacksmith made this on-the record, false statement: "[Kollerstrom] is a Holocaust-denier".

“But, in a nutshell, Kollerstrom is not a Holocaust-denier. On the contrary, he fully concedes that masses of Jews were killed by the Nazis.

“But, anyway, the plain fact is, wholly contrary to Blacksmith's claims, Kollerstrom is not a Holocaust-denier.” 

Look at that windy but not-so-subtle "on the record", translation: Blacksmith can't withdraw this libel now (I might even send it to Richard). Oh, how I shivered.

The statement was, naturally, accepted as fact, by his assembled floaters.  Still is, no doubt. That's what they do.

Show it to Us (1)

Now let's pause here, Bennett. Quite apart from the mirth you generate I don't mind how you spend your time posting about double glazing makers, versatile concrete mixers, show business sodomy with a bottle, or the sordid McCanns. But when you decide to stray into the real world, my world, and respond to serious  matters  like a post describing the fact that, after nameless and unspeakable horrors, my stepfather’s family was gassed in the Auschwitz  chambers with the very Zyklon-B  that Kollerstrom denies was used there, you'd better have something more to offer than support for the Holocaust distorter  who demeaned those deaths, you filthy, squalid, demented, fucking ignoramus. 

Right, that's out of the way. Now  Bennett’s evidence that my statement that Kollerstrom is a Holocaust denier is "false". Let's see it; show it to us.

Are you kidding? There isn't any to show. There never was. The buffoon was lying through his teeth. As usual. 

Two years ago, with plenty of time to have sought out the facts about Hall's friend. Nothing. And no correction.  

Kollerstrom is not just relevant to Bennett and the Pit, as well as Hall and those who think like him. His entire way of thinking and operating is, in fact, a template for that of the "truthseekers" and most of the Usual Suspects: you couldn't  get a cigarette paper between them, so close are their approaches, their vanity, their methods  and their self-deception.

You were wrong, Bennett, you fucking compulsive liar. So anxious were you to defend your benighted site and your lunatic friends and associates who think exactly like you and whose "scholarship" is just like your own, that you even lied about responses to the Holocaust itself, you disgusting, morally dead,  creature.
 

Finally: this week the number of Pit posters, according to the site statistics, was at one point exceeded by the number of search-robots. Score:   Google robots 2, Bing robot 1, posters 2.

So it seems that the vast majority of the "8000" members may well have shown that they do indeed have a sense of shame and decency and have  responded to my repeated appeals to leave your filth-ridden pit and voted with their feet.  

____________________________________________________________

Show it To Us (2)

Certainly, for those interested. "Too long!" a remaining Pit dweller, will cry, adding, "we need short, snappy, stuff, like Blacksmith falsely accuses Kollerstrom. Sources are boring!"

Below are the evidence sources, which I didn’t even bother with at the time: the professor’s words, coupled with my own knowledge of the relevant history - considerably greater than Kollerstrom's, I can assure you -  instantly told me everything I needed to know. But unlike Bennett and the Usual Suspects I was telling the truth, knowing the facts would back me up. 

https://codoh.com/library/authors/1580/

See Nicholas Kollerstrom, "The Auschwitz ‘Gas Chamber' Illusion", Website of The Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust, 2008. On page one we have:

"Amongst all the archival material for the German Third Reich," he writes, "there has always been a notable lack of documentation* to support the existence of an intentional mass-extermination program – of Jews, or anyone else."**

That sentence is itself a definition of Holocaust denial. Leaving aside the asterisked  untruths, those words alone are a bullet-proof admission of Holocaust denial by a Holocaust denier. It is the word intentional, i.e. an executed  plan by a national government for the annihilation  of Europe's Jews, rather than mere pogroms or massacres or "epidemics", that lies at the heart of  the Holocaust. Denying the existence of intention denies the Holocaust.

*Lack of documentation:
There has never been a "notable lack of documentation" about the intentionality. Many  of the thousands of documents were carefully phrased and guarded and it is these that professional Holocaust deniers like Kollerstrom and his colleagues have concentrated on. Just like Bennett, they select and  distort, as well as misunderstand, the evidence. But the key sources expose the truth.

**Intention:
The minutes of the April 16/17 1943 Hitler & Ribbentrop meeting with Hungary’s leader Admiral Horthy, called to speed up the “special treatment” of the 800 000 remaining  Jews in that country, are conclusive in revealing the Holocaust intention. Horthy, who was dragging his feet, said openly that “surely he couldn’t beat the Jews to death”, to which foreign minister Ribbentrop replied, with Hitler (who according to the Holocaust deniers knew nothing about it) sitting beside him,  that they “must either be  annihilated or taken to concentration camps. There is no  other way”.

Hitler, the “man who wasn’t told about the Jew killings” then said: “They had to be treated like tuberculosis bacilli, from which a healthy body could be infected. That was not cruel,” he added, “if one remembered that even innocent natural creatures  like hares and deer had to be killed so that no harm was caused. Why should one spare the beasts who wanted to bring us Bolshevism once more? Nations who did not rid themselves of Jews perished”.

On 4 October 1943, Heinrich Himmler made a speech, in Posen, to about fifty senior SS men. In it he said, “I also want to mention a very grave matter here before you in complete frankness. We can talk about it quite openly among ourselves, but we shall never speak of it in public. Just as we did not hesitate to do our duty as we were ordered to on 30 June 1934, and stand comrades who had lapsed against the wall and shoot them, so we have never spoken about it, and we shall never speak of it.

It was a matter of tact, for all us, thank God, never to speak of it, never to talk of it. It appalled everyone, and yet everyone was absolute in his mind that he would do it again if ordered to do so, and if it should be necessary.

I am referring now to the “evacuation” of the Jews, the extermination of the Jewish people.”

And he added: “Most of you know what it means when 100 bodies lie side by side, or when 500 or a 1,000 lie there. To have stuck it out – apart from exceptions caused by human weakness – and to have remained decent, that has made us tough. This is a glorious entry in our history which has never been written, and can never be written.”

http://www.codoh.com/newrevoices/nrillusion.html

https://www.indexoncensorship.org/2008/04/debate-the-kollerstrom-question/

 “Nicholas Kollerstrom is a Holocaust denier, although he would, no doubt, prefer to be called a ‘revisionist’. He believes that ‘no German has ever placed a Jew in a gas chamber’ and that the only use to which Zyklon B gas was put at Auschwitz/Birkenau was that of delousing the mattresses of its ‘guests’; ‘guests’ who otherwise ‘enjoyed’ the very best hospitality that the Third Reich had to offer. That may sound rather strange and unhistorical, but that’s the view set out by Kollerstrom in an essay on school trips to Auschwitz published on the website of the ‘revisionist’ Committee for Open Debate on The Holocaust (CODOH)”

https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/respectable-revisionists-1.63523

http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-News/Iranian-website-promotes-Holocaust-denial

 

Magic

That's the End of That One

It looks like the purple woman  story may have been the peak of the "derail the investigation" game which has been running intermittently since 2013, a genuine, visible conspiracy  which has hitherto been ignored by everyone, internet or MSM,  except the Bureau.

 

This time the plotters overreached themselves and they know it. Now it will go quiet until the next stage of the investigations is reached, when the five year old strategy will have to be ditched for a rethink anyway: this one has failed. Always remember what the Bureau wrote back in 2012: "it's when the criminal lawyers start appearing, or getting mentioned,  that we'll know  the home straight is in sight." 

Sensible Posters Surface

In the last few weeks a lot of the energy has gone out of the kill Grange stuff. We've been gratified to see people re-asserting common sense at last, on twitter and elsewhere.  At least some among those who, we regret to say, have been fooled  by the hidden schemers into attacking the wrong target, have apparently been secretly re-assessing their own actions, or suddenly discovering new and Very Important Things to post about. 

 

Others have simply gone quiet. Of course it's always good when people start to wonder if they've been mistaken - our own non-criminal conspiracy over the past few years has been to get that process going - but it would be unwise to expect any recantations. Because, once again, it isn't down to changes of attitude or anything similar; it's down to the continuing, genuinely  magic, component  of the McCann Affair: the Empty Cupboard.

 

The Bureau invented that term back in 2011, when gaps first began to appear in the shelves where the Evidence for Abduction lunch-boxes had been before they  rotted away. Hunger first weakens, then slowly destroys sufferers, initial defiance and anger slowly fading into profound lassitude and then silence. Such is the fate of all those who've tried to live on the Abduction diet since 2007. Just look around you and listen.

And the Rest are Fading Away

Unfortunately our usual suspects, the Brown-shirts, the Pit Dwellers and the rest, made a horrible error in the face of this inexorable process: they thought it couldn't apply to them. It does. Why? Because of the one magic ingredient that none of us can ever master - time.   The Bureau hasn't out-argued anybody or "won" with a theory of its own, common sense hasn't struck, nobody has demolished any claims in "internet debate". Time has worked alone without anyone having to lift a finger. Time has revealed that there is nothing there.  

 

Abduction was the first to be starved out. Oh, some of its supporters pretend they still believe in it but it doesn't matter: it's not belief  that's missing, it's strength and energy - which need feeding - that have gone, as anyone who reads the comments of the few remaining believers will immediately discern. There are  only so many times people can post up that paragraph from the Archiving Summary before wondering how much longer they can go on.

 

But since 2013 or so the same starvation-at-source  has afflicted the Usual Suspects and their "theories". Just as the early claims for abduction -  what the Bureau calls the Shutter Effect -  were never followed up with supporting facts as statistically they should have been, so all the hints and suspicions of Wayback, government cover-ups, Murdoch protection and the rest have been followed up by nothing - except more hints and suspicions.

Show it to us!

Hints and suspicions alone, however prolonged  and repeated, are strictly masturbation: fine for the indulger but incapable of being shared or influencing others.   As the Archiving Summary said "Let Us See"  - if you've got evidence then don't hint of it, don't drown yourself in HTML, don't wrap its non-existence in thousands of words of blue-pencilled dross or impenetrable  Spanish Labyrinths, don't just call people cunts for wanting to see it,   but show it to us. That's all evidence is: show it to us. Otherwise you're on your own.

There is nothing to show. 

 

The last time we  stood, swaying, over the edge of the Cesspit, that positively Bilderberg Institute of research and hidden influence, the sense of enervation was overwhelming, as if they were struggling to stay awake in the presence of  the sewer gas. The statistics panel said it all: the  member numbers are listed as  8 000 plus, the peak daily poster numbers, many years ago now, in the hundreds.  The Number of members posting the other  evening? Six.

 

Dr Roberts, the well-known Wayback expert, has either been assassinated by Gamble  or been muted by Pat Brown's  killer squad, so limp is his silence; Only In America, the pensioner's weekly, has succumbed, apparently, to senility as well as Tourette's and starvation; Textusa appears to be saying that her blog is ending. Or not. Or maybe. Who knows? Starvation strikes people in different ways.  The Madeleine McCann support website looks, and reads, like a neglected cemetery.  And, strikingly, what we called the 30/40 club, the core of troubled, sometimes compromised, abduction fanatics whose numbers remained the same from 2008 until Amaral's victory, is down almost to single figures, with whole weeks passing without a post.

 

All the people mentioned, and the McCanns themselves, have hope that things will improve in their favour. Not a chance, chums.  People, good or bad,  need hope but the Bureau's analysis and conclusion since 2011, if it is correct - and time has convinced us that it is - means that there isn't the slightest hope as far as the known claims of either side are concerned: you can't produce something from an empty cupboard. Show it to us. 

 

The cupboards are empty for good: the claims are just claims. The magic of time, as the Bureau has said before, is in fact the magic of truth, for time washes away falsity but leaves the truth untouched, like rocks emerging from the tide.   

 

Ask Grange, whose  shelves are bulging.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Singing From The Same Sheet

Concluding our views on the criminal conspiracy targeting Operation Grange - about which nobody except the Bureau is bothered.  The available evidence is laid out  here:

https://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/successful-conspiracy.html

Used - the earliest "opposition" victims

Its Actions

• The small group behind the conspiracy invents important Grange suspects and plants them in convincing tabloid media stories (packages). All of the “important suspects” are fakes and most have never existed at all.
• The planted, fake  stories, all pretending to be written by journalists on the various tabloids they appear in, give an impression of buffoonish incompetence by Grange – picking, chasing and losing suspects, following false leads, never producing results, always promising arrests soon.

Used back in 2007 - the foulmouthed victim, Tony Parsons

Its Aims

• In the four years that the conspiracy has been in operation its underlying message – the conclusions they want you to draw from the fake facts – has progressively strengthened. It has always concealed its motives but at first it also concealed its intentions.
•  
• So  for a couple of years it pretended to be in favour of Grange, even though its claims were always detrimental to the real investigation. As time has passed, though, the message that Grange is a failure that should be denied further funds and scrapped has become stronger and stronger.
  

  

 

Used - the nanny hating victim 

 

Entering Desperate Times

With the latest stories the attack has intensified to desperate levels and the mainstream press has once again been corrupted not just into carrying the plants - unwise but perhaps forgivable in this hard world - but adopting them and suggesting to the public they are true. That is deception.

It is what happened in early 2007. Then, for example, the MSM all carried claims fed to them via friends, contacts  and family of the McCanns that the apartment 5A “shutters had been damaged” or “jemmied” – inventions that  the claimants have never repeated since.  

But it was only as the affair progressed that the MSM adopted the line  that the McCann family  were truthful witnesses of what happened, meaning that they were telling the public the jemmied claims and other lies weren't lies at all. That was the beginning of the  MSM's descent into disguising paid-for opinion derived from hidden sources as factual news: deception. Exactly the same deception as Piers Morgan allowed at the Mirror to make himself money from share deals.   There the MSM remain.

Look at what the Mail is now saying for itself:

“Why is the British taxpayer being asked to finance Operation Grange further when all other leads have come to dispiriting dead-ends?”

"But there comes a time in every police inquiry into a disappearance when the question of how long it should continue has to be asked.”

Used - blogger Craig Murray*

So, just as in May 2007, the Mail has  slipped from printing fake stories provided by hidden sources down the slope into presenting them to its readers as the truth.  
So much for the lost, corrupted  and rudderless MSM, which in 2007 were used by people in the McCann camp and in 2018 are being used, once again, to influence people’s opinions, this time by people unknown. Nothing has changed - not because the media are monsters but because the intelligence, expertise and methods of those who've  penetrated ("hollowed out") the MSM exceeds that of journalists and editors.

Who Gains?

But who is using them so effectively? These things cost time and money; we’re not talking pranksters or hobbyists here but funded and professional operators working for years in the dark world of planted “news”. And what’s in it for the originators?

They want Grange to end, obviously –  they want it dead. They want people to believe it’s useless. The suspects, they  say, are ridiculous. The lines of investigation go nowhere.  And so on.  Despite the fact that there’s no evidence at all that the McCanns themselves are behind this conspiracy the similarities to the 2007/8 Portuguese investigation are creepily similar: someone is using the same methods to discredit another Madeleine McCann investigation.

Thus, for example, the MSM in 2007 carried the consistent message that the Portuguese investigation had failed; that it was junk; that it was led by an untalented buffoon; that its prime suspects were not the McCanns. And so on.

Someone is frightened that Grange is a success.  The only people who could be frightened of that are potential or actual suspects.  

 

__________________________________________________________________________________

STOP PRESS

Maybe the Bureau's writings on this scandal are finally having a result.

For the very first time Clarence Mitchell has moved to distance the McCanns from what has been going on for four years.

“The Met Police have requested extra funding and  have been granted it," he tells the tabloids.  “It’s not helpful and is very hurtful for retired police officers and in the past so called crime experts and other families to say the investigation should be wound up and is a waste of public money."

Understandably Mitchell has failed to mention that he has been a contributor - not a proven conspirator but an enthusiastic contributor - to nearly all the corrupt packaged stories the Bureau has been writing  about, both as a "a source" and as "a pal" or "a friend" and under his own name

We suggested that the conspirators had gone too far with the latest, desperate effort, the Purple Woman junk which took the subversion of Grange to new levels. And they have. And guess who participated in that story -  

 

"It is this ‘woman in purple’, the Mail understands, "who is keeping alive Operation Grange, the marathon reinvestigation of the Madeleine McCann case by Scotland Yard, now in its sixth year.

 

A source told the Sun : 'There is no evidence they [M/S Purple and Mr Paedophile] were involved [!!] but it would be good to eliminate them from the investigation."  

Now who do you think that was?

 

_______________________________________________________________________________



Singing From the Same Sheet 

The giant  difference from 2007 is the supposed “opposition” to the hollowed-out MSM:  internet groups. The overwhelming 2007 internet view was that the media were being conned or had been corrupted  and the truth was not being printed – and they were absolutely right, as Kate McCann, of all people, has proved with her written confession that the pair  had concealed the explosive fact that in August 2007 they were police suspects - not arguidos but suspects  whose home had been raided -  by lying to the media.

But gradually something very weird has happened, as we mentioned in our first piece on the conspiracy: almost all the well-known internet groups now, on FB, twitter and websites, have swung 180 degrees and are in complete agreement with the Mail and the other junk tabloids.  Some opposition! 

Look at the twin paths of these supposedly opposed groupings: the Mail and its peers have gone from swallowing the lies offered to it in May 2007, through believing the clanking, steam-driven PJ publicity “machine” feeds that the McCanns would be toast by October, to the libel courts, apathy, then "disgraced cop Amaral” land and finally, in 2018, opting to publicise a conspiracy’s attempts to discredit and kill an investigation into the fate of Madeleine McCann.  

The internet “opposition”, following the loss of  most of its sane and intelligent commentators years ago,  has  gone from scepticism about the McCanns, to believing the same PJ “toast” feeds,  to crushed disappointment at the archiving and the libel courts,  and thence, defeated,  on to a journey away from reality into fantasy so deep and deranged  – Brownshirt killer squads, switched Madeleines, premeditated murder conspiracies between the McCanns and the ex-head of CEOP and the rest – that it can no be argued with rationally: they are genuinely beyond contact except from fellow sufferers.

They always gained their information chiefly from newspaper stories, not real sources, and our "researchers" are now paying a horrible price for drinking from such poisoned wells: none of them has the slightest idea of who or what to believe anymore, having played at attacking all sources of information indiscriminately and so they've been forced to fall back on the only thing left they trust - their  out-of control  imaginations which lured them into these quicksands  in the first place. Thus defeated they find themselves, like sleepwalkers, parroting the words  of the MSM and backing  attempts to discredit and kill an investigation into the child's fate.  

Used - the latest victim

 

On Tuesday the Mail, under the heading "Mr Sutton slammed a decision to hand the Met an extra £150,000 for the search", welcomes the hapless Colin Sutton into the latest assault on Grange. Another recruit.  

Meanwhile, thank God, the police in both countries appear to remain on target. Unknown conspirators have made the Bureau even more certain of that. It's not their bullshit that convinces us, though.  It's the fact that people with their liberty at risk aren't frightened of  buffoonish and failed investigations: they lie awake at night wondering how to deflect the scary ones, those  that are on the right track.
_________________________________________________________________________________

*Murray, another hero of the quicksand-bound,  doesn't like the Grange funding either.

OK Craig, you've written, "I am going to come straight out with this... in the full knowledge that some decent people will be outraged, here it is."

What are you going to come out with?  And what evidence have you got?

We plough through the hearsay and the suspicions and the gossip and the stuff about McCann parenting - come on Craig, everybody says that, what's your inside ambassadorial knowledge that fixes the conspiracy,  where's the  smoking gun that you suppressed in 2014 and that will outrage decent people?

Ah, got one,  a source! Yep, the nutter Anglophobe  internet conspiracy theorist   Joana Morais, who wasn't there either. Uh-huh. Craig, you're supposed to be supplying people like her with confirmatory evidence, not the other way round. Oh, and a Belgian newspaper "no longer available". Dearie me, we thought you were talking with inside knowledge.  Oh well, when you can't quote Tony Blair verbatim, Joana Morais will have to do.

Finally, after hundreds of words of junk gossip we get to what Mr Murray, the insider,  knows. Prepare to be outraged, decent people, by his conclusions.

"I do believe [meaning "don't know", our italics] that the McCanns were less than exemplary parents," [that's a state secret, isn't it?]  "I believe that New Labour’s No.10 saw, in typical Blair fashion, a highly photogenic tragedy which there might be popularity in appearing to work on.

And I believe there is a genuine danger that the high profile support from the top of the British government might have put some psychological pressure on the Portuguese investigators and prosecuting officers in their determinations [their what?]."

Fucking devastating, isn't it? Murray turns out to be lost in the quicksand himself.