Why would the" Government /Home office ram home the abduction facade"

I can't think who K H is either!

P.S. Just woken up, it must be Kate Healy.

tanszi wrote:not of this world at the moment Oldartform too early in day, who is H E please.

I believe some blogs/forums have already been in trouble for mentioning his name in full so am a bit cautious ..... Hen** Ext** and the other fellow is Kevin Halligen.

Oldartform wrote:

tanszi wrote:not of this world at the moment Oldartform too early in day, who is H E please.

I believe some blogs/forums have already been in trouble for mentioning his name in full so am a bit cautious ..... Hen** Ext** and the other fellow is Kevin Halligen.

WHY ISN'T WE ALLOWED TO MENTION H.E(NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH A HAMPSHIRE VILLAGE!)

A government cover up and ramming home the abduction theory doesn't quite match up with the PM ordering a "review". Was he not let in on the secret or is it an elaborate plot to make the case go away. If the latter it's a damned expensive way of doing it.

Badboy wrote:

Oldartform wrote:

tanszi wrote:not of this world at the moment Oldartform too early in day, who is H E please.

I believe some blogs/forums have already been in trouble for mentioning his name in full so am a bit cautious ..... Hen** Ext** and the other fellow is Kevin Halligen.

WHY ISN'T WE ALLOWED TO MENTION H.E(NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH A HAMPSHIRE VILLAGE!)

Paulo Reis reproduced an article by Mark Hollingsworth which quoted information about H.E. Paulo soon after received a letter from Bindmans asking him to remove it because any mention of H.E. was not allowed as it was under a D Notice (which is applied when there is supposed to be a threat to national security). Paulo Reis`s blog is not registered in the UK so he wrote back to Bindmans and his reply is here :-

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com.es/2009_10_01_archive.html

you have to scroll down to see it.

Angelina wrote:A government cover up and ramming home the abduction theory doesn't quite match up with the PM ordering a "review". Was he not let in on the secret or is it an elaborate plot to make the case go away. If the latter it's a damned expensive way of doing it.

Absolutely agree.

Just because we don't know the reasons for all sorts of as yet unexplained goings-on (or apparent goings-on) doesn't means that there really is a widespread and seemingly all-permeating cover-up.

The trouble is, however, there are unexplained goings-on (or apparent goings-on) and it is the nature of the beast that lack of knowledge leads to speculation by many and then to conspiracy theory by some. People like to have an explanation, even if there is no more evidence for whatever they come up with than there is for whatever the next person comes up with.

But even if the conspiracy theorists have hit upon explanations with a grain of truth in them, the truth will out eventually. I'm afraid I don't find it credible that there would not come a point where one individual would blow the whistle in some way. All edifices have weak points - and human nature has many facets.

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Angelina wrote:A government cover up and ramming home the abduction theory doesn't quite match up with the PM ordering a "review". Was he not let in on the secret or is it an elaborate plot to make the case go away. If the latter it's a damned expensive way of doing it.

Absolutely agree.

Just because we don't know the reasons for all sorts of as yet unexplained goings-on (or apparent goings-on) doesn't means that there really is a widespread and seemingly all-permeating cover-up.

The trouble is, however, there are unexplained goings-on (or apparent goings-on) and it is the nature of the beast that lack of knowledge leads to speculation by many and then to conspiracy theory by some. People like to have an explanation, even if there is no more evidence for whatever they come up with than there is for whatever the next person comes up with.

But even if the conspiracy theorists have hit upon explanations with a grain of truth in them, the truth will out eventually. I'm afraid I don't find it credible that there would not come a point where one individual would blow the whistle in some way. All edifices have weak points - and human nature has many facets.

The problem is a lot of what people are going on comes from press reports...and we know how (un)reliable those are don't we. Also, although some of the files have been released and translated (and things can get distorted in translation quite unintentionally), there are other files which have not been released so we are only seeing part of the whole thing.

It does seem to me that some people (irrespective of viewpoint) have dreamed up certain scenarios based on the above, come to a conclusion and can't move on from that even tho they may be wrong. Worse still, they manipulate so-called facts to suit their theory.

What it comes down to after 5 years is that we don't know zilch, or almost zilch. As you say, someone on one of these forums may have guessed everything correctly but whether we ever get to find out about it is another matter.

I agree with you, when you consider the amount of people who would be involved in such a cover up...I can't see that one of them wouldn't have given something away by now, even inadvertently.

Again, I agree wholeheartedly.

But it is to be hoped that:

a. Our efforts aren't in vain and that the public consciousness continues not to be allowed to forget that the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance is still very much unresolved

b. That there are people (SY, PJ and umbrella Forces, ?? Politicians ......., Healy/McCann + "friends", acquaintances) who do know rather more than zilch.

c. Someone has the guts to break ranks

Oldartform wrote:

Badboy wrote:

Oldartform wrote:

tanszi wrote:not of this world at the moment Oldartform too early in day, who is H E please.

I believe some blogs/forums have already been in trouble for mentioning his name in full so am a bit cautious ..... Hen** Ext** and the other fellow is Kevin Halligen.

WHY ISN'T WE ALLOWED TO MENTION H.E(NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH A HAMPSHIRE VILLAGE!)

Paulo Reis reproduced an article by Mark Hollingsworth which quoted information about H.E. Paulo soon after received a letter from Bindmans asking him to remove it because any mention of H.E. was not allowed as it was under a D Notice (which is applied when there is supposed to be a threat to national security). Paulo Reis`s blog is not registered in the UK so he wrote back to Bindmans and his reply is here :-

http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com.es/2009_10_01_archive.html



you have to scroll down to see it.

Seems Bindmans were busy with this as Joana Morais revieved the same letter....


http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/09/d-notice-5.html

Well, Oldartform, though I log on regularly, just in case, I had very little hope of reading anything new. However, I had not read about the specific DA notice slapped on Paulo Reis (about not mentioning H.E. by name) by Bindmans (spelling?). How silly! Even non specialist people like me know that DA notices (successors to D notices) are gentlemen's agreements between the British press, supposedly put on in the interests of British security. I knew that Blair had previously used them illegitimately over the Dunblane affair, but I definitely did not know someone had tried to con a foreign journalist, domiciled abroad and not using a British based ISP, that he was (how pompous and quasi-imperial) not to write anything he chose to write! I must say that shocked me.

Thank you for the reference to Paulo Reis's article, and to the bottom half of it, and at one remove, via the Reis article, the excellent reference to an admirable summary of early events in 'The Cracked Mirror'. Who wrote/writes 'The Cracked Mirror'? I know why I bother with this case so far onwards... over five years now... aside from trying to find out what happened to a nearly four year old child (I have twin granddaughters who are currently that age) it is because of the horrendous machinations surrounding the case.

TEIN, Angelina and the rest. I am certainly not a 'conspiracy theorist'... I usually feel that the simplest explanations are the most likely to be correct. I've just looked at Joana Morais' excellent blog, (I think one of you already said she had been blessed with one) and found she too received A DA notice! Amazing! THE BRITISH EMPIRE, with all its Bufton Tuftons, is not dead! She printed her article with the 'offending' (hah!) words redacted/blacked out. I'm not sure all this isn't laughable rather than sinister. Unlike many people, I believe (from personal experience) that Cameron is on the level. I know the case was discussed between friends/acquaintances (and I don't mean the likes of Rebekah Brooks!) of his early on, before he ever became PM. He had young children of similar age too. Of course, if there is a massive web of intrigue (more likely of bureaucracy and noses out of joint) he will not be able to be Boss Cat and make sure Scotland Yard does the job it should really be doing in liaison with the PJ and the Portuguese Attorney General.

TEIN, Angelina and the rest. I am certainly not a 'conspiracy theorist'... I usually feel that the simplest explanations are the most likely to be correct. I've just looked at Joana Morais' excellent blog, (I think one of you already said she had been blessed with one) and found she too received A DA notice! Amazing! THE BRITISH EMPIRE, with all its Bufton Tuftons, is not dead! She printed her article with the 'offending' (hah!) words redacted/blacked out. I'm not sure all this isn't laughable rather than sinister. Unlike many people, I believe (from personal experience) that Cameron is on the level. I know the case was discussed between friends/acquaintances (and I don't mean the likes of Rebekah Brooks!) of his early on, before he ever became PM. He had young children of similar age too. Of course, if there is a massive web of intrigue (more likely of bureaucracy and noses out of joint) he will not be able to be Boss Cat and make sure Scotland Yard does the job it should really be doing in liaison with the PJ and the Portuguese Attorney General.

(Sorry about my double posting above. Perhaps I clicked it twice). I have just logged on to Joana's site again, to see if there were any/ many comments on the article with the DA notice and the blacked out names. It has been removed. Yes really! Perhaps Joana has been given legal advice which says 'let us see what this implies here in Portugal as opposed to in the UK'. Surely a DA notice doesn't hold good there at all!... unless there is some specific agreement between Britain and Portugal that we know not of. Of course it could just be a mistake, and it will appear later on with different bits, or no bits blacked out!

Where did Mark Hollingsworth write the original article? Is he a journalist, or a blogger, or just an interested party? Lilly, can you help me? TEIN... I am hoping for c.

Can anyone tell me who wrote/writes 'The Cracked Mirror'?

I know what his previous job was and all that... but surely that does not give you carte blanche to control the UK press, and even to try to control the foreign press. Is it supposed that some scheme in which he and others were involved went horribly wrong?... I have an imagination, as others do, but I'm after knowing what is genuinely known... without mentioning names or previous jobs of course! How ludicrous (to use a good old fashioned Team McCann word) this all is! I'm feeling slightly out of the loop.

I just didn't do enough easy and simple research...

Found this but dont know who wrote it???

http://madeleinemccannaffair.blogspot.co.uk/

Thanks, Lilly...