STOLEN VOICE

I am the ball that scores political goals

I am the force for bigots and trolls

I am the reason to justify a cause

I am the flag that is taken to wars

I am the paper for writing poison in stacks

I am the bullet that starts the attacks

I am the knife that stabs in the dark

I am the confrontational spark

I am all of these things but not from my choice

I am unable to speak with my stolen voice

I am crying for everyone to know who I AM

The missing child who is Madeleine McCann

Pat Browns Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann

So this is a criminal profile? I would expect a criminal profiler with any integrity, to work with law enforcement using information directly from an ongoing investigation. That contribution not made public unless the law enforcement agency demanded it.

Yet here we have a profile constructed from investigative information that has been concluded by the Portuguese prosecutor as having no evidence to determine a crime, let alone suspects for a crime and therefore has no validation to be tested in court.

Since when does a criminal profiler use a case to propagate actions ensuring witnesses are tested in the court of public justice; mob rule?

Pat Brown, how professional must you be to plant yourself on a case you have not been invited to contribute to, by law enforcement. To use information from the files, translated with different meanings depending on which site you found the translations. Mixed with insinuations by those who are prejudiced against the McCann’s on two bigoted websites and the beliefs of the former PJ inspector who lead the investigation, Goncalo Amaral, who is now a convicted criminal?

I believe you are fully aware that your peers and former mentor’s will hang their heads in shame at you. But I don’t believe that matters at all, when your agenda is clearly to seek publicity in the media and on the small screen to further your business of ‘controversial criminal profiler’ to increase TV ratings and ultimately, your income.

Was professional profiling with respect and integrity not lucrative enough for you?

Country Worse Than Before Revolution. Portugal Survey.

A staggering part of the Portuguese population claims to be suspicious of the country’s present political powers, and consider themselves poorly informed about the country’s development over the past decade.

This has led the majority to conclude the country is worse-off now than what it was prior to the ‘Carnation Revolution’, which took place on 25 April 1974 and freed the country from Salazar’s authoritarian dictatorship regime.

These were the clear results of a survey carried out by the Farol Project, for which 1,002 people were interviewed.

A massive 92 percent of those questioned for the survey said they were suspicious or trusted ‘very little’ the Portuguese political scene; 89 percent said they were wary of the country’s political parties, 84 percent said they distrusted Portugal’s parliament, and 90 percent is mistrusting of the government.

And, when asked for a current diagnosis of the country, 46 percent of interviewees said they thought Portugal’s present economic and social conditions were “worse” or “much worse compared to 40 years ago.”

When compared to the more recent past, 58 percent replied they thought the situation at present is “worse” or “much worse” than before Portugal became part of the EU.

The respondents were also pessimistic about the next decade, with 53 percent believing the economic situation is going to “worsen” or “significantly worsen.”

Upon learning of the survey’s results Belmiro de Azevedo, head of retail group Sonae, who also participated in the study, said “the sample [of interviewees] is made up of people who are scared.”

He criticized the country’s politicians, saying “Lets leave electoral and political folklore alone and lets get down to some serious work.”

 The Portugal News.

Official Find Madeleine Campaign

It is exactly three and a half years since our daughter Madeleine was so cruelly taken from us. Three and a half years without her seeing her brother, her sister, her Mummy, her Daddy or her best friends. We need your support to continue to lobby the British and Portuguese Governments to undertake a joint or independent review of Madeleine’s case.Independent review of Madeleine McCann's case

Independent review of Madeleine McCann's case
www.ipetitions.com

We call on the UK and Portuguese authorities to conduct an independent and transparent review of all information in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

Amaral Still Being Tested in Court!!

The court of appeal in Lisbon today, the 19th day of October, 2010,  revoked the ban imposed by the civil courts placed upon Sr Amaral's book, The Truth of the Lie.

The question being tested is one of free speech. The appeal court has decided that Amaral's book is allowable as a publication under the European understanding of human rights and free speech.

The book was written by the former inspector leading the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The ban was invoked after the parents of Madeleine, Kate and Gerry Mccann, challenged the book which contains the inspectors opinion that the child was killed and the body hidden with the parents involvement. The evidence the inspector presents is flawed. His main 'facts' pointing to a reason leading to proving a death being the use of Calpol to induce the child into a deep sleep, the sniffer dogs indicating the presence of Cadaver and misunderstandings of 15 out of 19 markers in Madeleine's profile being a percentage indication of a dead Madeleine.

Only 'Calpol Night' can induce sleep and that had not come into production at the time Madeleine vanished. Basic Calpol is not a sleep inducer. The internationally renowned forensic organisation, FSS, concluded that the dogs findings indicate no conclusive evidence of death or presence of Madeleine. Possibly dried body fluids which can indicate the same as cadaver scent being equally as possible of actual cadaver scent. Not withstanding that Madeleine's DNA was not conclusive in the results either. 15 out of the 19 markers in Madeleine's profile were found within 37 markers. That is 37 markers contaminated by several known alive people and no conclusive indication of Madeleine's identity in the results as contamination included the family who share her markers. That puts a different picture on evidence showing 15 out of 19.  Therefore the forensics proved a false positive and in layman's terms the Dogs evidence canceled itself out.

Commonly the argument is being used that presenting evidence of 15 out of 19 markers indicating Madeleine's cadaver is enough to convict the parents by circumstantial evidence and probability. Enough evidence to test Amaral's theory in court. Yet after the explanation by experts that the math is actually 15 out of 37 markers also contaminated by people who would share those 15 markers, the thesis has not been revised and the argument, totally flawed, is still being promoted.

All the former inspector Amaral could gain from the book is money. Not the truth, not the sharing of evidence, just monetary gain. That to any fair minded person is offensive, but free speech does not define offense. That definition is tested by the law if the offended take it to court. Currently Sr Amaral is being tested in court for libel and damaging the search for Madeleine. Personally I view his book as an exploitation of a child......abuse. To make money from a tragedy yet to be solved using the name of a child and misinformation for monetary gain.

In short. The appeal court has decided the publication is acceptable within the boundary of free speech. That is,  one can say whatever they want in the Portuguese constitution. But the human right to test such a publication's value of defamation, libel and damage to the search for a child who may well be alive is still in the hands of the Portuguese judiciary. The result of that case will be more telling of the complete package.....free speech with responsibility.

If we are to gain any positives from this. I would like to think that a book being sold internationally, trying to convince people a missing child is dead and therefore there should be closure on searching for an alive child, will have more weight for it's author being successfully sued than a book not being sold to the public. The biggest positive being the funds raised from the book will help find Madeleine!!

It is important to remember that despite opinions about what happened to Madeleine The Portuguese prosecutor studied the case files, including Amarals conclusion and gave us the legal conclusion to the unsolved mystery.

Quote from: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:

a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;

b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.

Mr Amaral, freedom of speech is no defense against exploiting Madeleine McCann.

 

This is England

Shane Meadows, This is England. This is a briliiant film covering England in Thatchers early 80's through the eyes of a group of Skinhead friends. The skins were second wave, relating the history of their roots from the original, spirit of 69' Trojan Skins era, to the next generation. Back in 1969 the original Skins grew out of working class culture fashion with a mix of the Jamaican rude boys and Mods having Ska and Reggae as the sub culture's music. The music reflecting the mixed races dealing with their shared working class oppression in the UK. The second wave found the sub culture infiltrated by the National Front, who hijacked the skinhead and the national flag to turn the working class sub culture into a white supremacy fascist public profile. The film, however, did not dwell on just the politics of that era, touching on Thatcher and the Falklands war while staying firmly following the lives of the group of friends and how life in that era treated them and how they treated life, consequently.

Then this year Shane Meadows presented us with a mini series of This is England. Set with the friends a few years on, into 1986. Still showing their Skinhead culture roots with Reggae music and including the mod links with songs from the Jam. The mini series dived deeper into the individual characters and we had an explosive, moving, sad and funny view of life, almost in their skins (excuse the pun). The series reminded me very much of another mini series, the Boys from the Blackstuff.

Boys from the Blackstuff received many accolades which have never been repeated for a British produced series. A strong, moving and funny account of having to deal with unemployment in Thatcher Britain, the Blackstuff is part of the 80's. Now we have another mini series with the same power and soul. Will we be treated to more?

Yes please Shane. Bring back the Skins!!

Jim Gamble Resigns From CEOP

Child abduction, exploitation and abuse has historically been low down in the list of government priorities in this country. Having spoken to parents of missing children and charity workers, the hunger for support is huge. The very few charities that offer support are all that has been available.

The CEOP and Gamble offered a professional and well organised standard of support and prevention to the general public. It was an extremely positive application to protect exploited and abused children, not stopping there; going on to offer support for those who, before CEOP, it was too late.

At the end of the day, it should come as no surprise that money talks with government policies and sadly the latest changes being made as to who runs CEOP is a step nearer to it being at risk of being cut back or chopped altogether if cut backs are required.

So it could be back to charities and volunteers to plead for help and provide support. Saddest of all, left to the parents and families of the missing themselves to only have those few charities and volunteer support groups for help. That doesn't devalue those charities at all. It actually compounds how important they are. It compounds how important they need government backing.

This is why it was such a positive battle won for the parents of missing children. The battle to get Amber recognised Europe wide with awareness and ground level support from parents of a missing child, Kate and Gerry McCann. Kate and Gerry have not only had to deal with their loss but have used their tragedy to help massively all other missing children and those groups who support and really, really, need that help.

Conspiracy Theorists. A Useful Guide By Donna Ferentes.

Brenda Ryan, Anthony Bennett and their supporters spring to mind immediately upon reading Donna's guide.

Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.

Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.

Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.

Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it's “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.

It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.