Friday, 1 February 2013

Monkeys In Business

Monkeys?” said Fred.

“Where? What?” said I looking at myself to see If I he’d put on a piece of clothing with some sort of pattern that appeared like that animal...

“The monkey business you talked about yesterday.”

“Oh, yes I remember now, I did say I was going to tell you all about that scientific experiment.”

Scientific experiment? You mean some sort of clutter influenced the outcome of that war that you talked about yesterday?”

“No, dear, I’m talking about a real scientific experimentation… well I don’t know if it ever took place really as it’s more sort of a story, but even if it didn’t it could, as you’ll see.”

“So do tell…”

“The story goes like this:

There was this a group of scientists studying behavioural patterns and they put 4 monkeys, A, B, C and D inside a cage.

The cage had a wooden ladder that went up to a single wooden platform. The floor of the cage was metal and wired up to a switch.

The scientists put a banana dangling above the platform. Clearly visible that it was only one banana. Mind you, the monkeys had to eat where they were but on that wooden platform only was one banana.

The quickest of the monkeys raced up the ladder for it.

The moment he was on the ladder, the scientists hit the switch causing a mild but painful electric shock to the other 3 monkeys that remained on the floor.

This process was repeated as many times as was necessary for the monkeys to make the connections between the shocks they were getting with the fact that one of them was going up the ladder for the banana.

Once that was clear, what do you think was the monkeys’ reaction when the next banana was put in place?”

“Be the first to get it? That’s what I would do! Let the others get shocked, plus have the banana for myself!!”

“Yes, but that would leave 3 very unhappy monkeys waiting for you…”

“That’s life, pals…”

“Yes, now you wouldn’t always be the fastest one up the ladder would you?”


“So what would you do?”

“Well, I would make sure that if I didn’t get it no other would! If anyone as so much tried to touch that ladder I’d clobber him down!”

“Exactly!  And that was what the monkeys did. They no longer cared about the banana but focused on stopping any other to even as so much as touch the ladder!

The monkeys quickly understood that whenever a banana was put up on that platform the only way they weren’t shocked was if no monkey went up the ladder.

This meant that if one tried to go for the banana the other three would jump and not allow him to go up the ladder.”

Clever monkeys!”

“So the experiment reached a point when a banana was put up the reaction of the monkeys would be just to look at it without even the slightest attempt of going for it.

Once this was achieved, they took out monkey A and put in monkey E.

Monkey E, unaware of the consequences of going up the ladder had the natural reaction of going for the banana when it was put there.

He was stopped every single time because monkeys B, C and D jumped on him.

Soon monkey E realized that all his attempts to go up that ladder would be abruptly stopped by the other 3 monkeys, so he stopped trying. Whenever a banana was put up he just looked at it like all other 3.

Notice that his stimulus was completely different from the other three. He associated the reaction of the fellow monkeys to the ladder and not the banana. For him it was the ladder that was forbidden territory. And he came to that conclusion without being shocked!

Then they took out monkey B and put in monkey F. Monkey F as soon as they put up the banana did what monkey E had done and went for the ladder and the same as monkey E monkey F was stopped by the other three, which included monkey E.

Monkeys C and D stopped monkey F for a completely different reason than monkey E. He helped stop monkey F because, as I said, he had assimilated that the use of that ladder was prohibited. So whenever F tried E was there with the rest of the gang to stop him.

Monkey F became like the other monkeys that just looked up to the dangling banana up on the platform.

Time to change monkeys. Out came C, in went G. And when G tried, D, E and F stopped him until G became also a “banana onlooker”.

Change the monkeys again. Out comes D, in goes H. H goes for the ladder and E, F and G don’t give him a chance. H becomes an onlooker too.

And this process was repeated until you had four monkeys W, X, Y and Z in a cage with a banana and none would make an attempt to eat it.

They would just look at the banana. None of them ever went up the ladder.

Notice that out of all the monkeys put in that cage, ONLY monkeys A, B, C and D had suffered electric shocks. All others from then on simply didn’t go up the ladder because all the rest of the monkeys in the cage would stop him to do it.”

“So the experiment proves that we do things in a certain way without questioning as to why just because we see other people doing that thing that way, is that the conclusion?”

“That’s right, and that is the normal conclusion that is made out of this experiment, but there’s another, and a much more relevant one.”

“And it is?”

“Will tell you in a minute.”

“Why won’t you tell me now?!?”

“Because I want you to understand completely its importance! Imagine that I’m drawing you a Treasure Map. I have to first fill in all the details before marking the X. If I just marked the X on a blank piece of paper and tell you to go and dig up the gold would you be able to do it?”


"So be patient. I want you to understand its importance and for you the be able to do that you have to first understand what happened in the first the 34 months of the GMW, between September 2007 and July 2010."

“What happened in those 34 months?”

1,000 days, that’s what happened.”

“Yes, if I did a quick calculation in my head I would get there… what happened in that period, then?”

“Those first 1,000 days of the GMW were crucially important and the BHs just didn’t win it basically because of the second conclusion that can be taken from the monkey experiment.

Let me just tell you what, in our opinion, were the FIVE most relevant things happened in that period.

The FIRST thing was that those hundreds of thousands very quickly became “only” tens of thousands and those tens of thousands dwindled as quickly to the thousands and the figure just kept on decreasing to the point it became a problem to the BHs.”

“What problem? It seems to me that is what they wanted, or so you said yourself!”

“The problem was the 90/10 Murphy’s Law.”


“The 90/10 Murphy’s Law says that the completion of 90% of any task takes only 10% of the time and the remainder 10% to be completed will take up the other 90% of the time.

The BHs had been able to smother the enormous tidal McCann wave into the size of a common one and by making it “common” they made Maddie become just one amongst other trillion topics being discussed on the internet.

They did away with “90%” of the people quickly but it came to the point when the “mere” thousands just wouldn’t go away.

What the BHs had done with the success to drive the majority away had a secondary effect and that was to fortify the thousands that stayed. They took the vitriolic not as off-putting but rather as further reason to fight for justiceIt made them more resolute. It made them cry for justice even louder!

They not only wouldn’t go away as it seemed that they were there to stay and put up a fight every step of the way when it came to Maddie. The more heinous the BHs were the more determined these people seemed to become!

The only way to get these people off Maddie's internet highways, and rid of them, was to distract them away from the McCann apple on to another issue

This was done through vitriolic and senseless internal “cat-fights”. "Pretendy" fights between people who "were" on the "good" side of the fence

Awfully off-putting and extremely effective as it forced people to take sides, a very uncomfortable thing to do.

So, at around about the 1,000 day period what was being discussed was all the intra-fighting raging on the “Pro” camp. The McCann themes became nothing but background music.

So the first thing that happened during the 1,000 days was that the topics discussed had basically strayed away from its central topic to pure homemade BH clutter between less than 10,000 people or not even half of that.”


“The SECOND thing that happened was the second and most important conclusion that one can take from the monkey experiment I just spoke of.”

“Ah, finally!”

“See, you didn’t have to wait that long. Impatience is a thing the BHs explore a lot and that’s one, among so many reasons, they’re afraid of our blog. They know that patience is our family's middle name.

Anyway, when do you think that particular experiment was considered a success by the scientists?”

“When all the monkeys that had been shocked were out of the cage, so when monkeys A, B, C and D were out and monkeys E, F, G and H stopped trying to go for the banana?”

“Not totally right, but almost there. I would say that it was when monkey I stopped trying”

“Why a monkey later?

“It’s the monkey that confirms the results. Although monkey H was the first to be stopped by 3 “unshocked” monkeys, it is monkey I that confirms success. You weren’t far off as you can see.

So when monkey I stopped trying, what happened?”

“I don’t know! Maybe the scientists went to nearest pub to celebrate or each one went home…”

You’re absolutely right!”

“I am?”

“Yes, you are! And by your expression I can see that you don’t know why you’re right.

You’re right because there was a power shift.”


“What stopped the first monkeys, A, B, C and D going for the banana was the switch the scientist had in his hand and which he activated whenever a monkey went up the ladder, right?”


“So until the monkeys were “educated” otherwise, the power was in the scientist’s hand.

When the monkeys took upon themselves, unwittingly, the task of stopping other monkeys going up the ladder, the power to “save” the banana was no longer with the scientist but with the monkeys!

That’s why the scientists could go home and celebrate.”

“Oh, I get it! And how is that applicable to the GMW?”

“Well, if initially you had a set of controlling players, the "scientists", after 1,000 days of conflict the power had shifted long ago to the “monkeys”.

And these "scientists" were pretty much satisfied with the “monkeys”.”

“How’s that?”

“They had been able to contain with success the unexpected Summer Offensive of 08.”

“Summer Offensive of 08? Unexpected?”

”Yes, the public release of the PJ Files and Amaral’s book

The first was so unexpected that I bet that most of those who “helped” in the cover-up wouldn’t have done so or, at least, have their names in it, if they even suspected that the public would be able to see what they had done and said. An elderly lady comes to mind… but not only her. So many others.”

The second, the book, no one expected the man to have had the courage to have done what he did!

Both these actions greatly hindered the BH cause and the defensive campaign to maintain the focus on the McCanns and only the McCanns proved to be highly successful. No one talked about the “apple tree” although she was all over the PJ Files as we’ve proven time and time again.

So the scientists were happy to leave the monkeys to do the business and went on with their lives, thus completing the power shift cycle.

In the eyes of the “deciders” the “monkeys” were doing a good job so all they basically did after that was to turn their heads on the Maddie case and give it a glance from time to time, progressively at  bigger and bigger intervals.

Look at the tabloids as an example. During “The McCann Hunting party 07” they were mere enablers and nothing more than that. They received instructions and executed them. They helped, a lot, to get the message across, but weren’t in the centres of decision.

During the first months of the GMW, they maintained that status but with time began acting more and more alone much to the pleasure of their “trainers” who witnessed a “job” being well done.

Soon the “trainers” felt comfortable enough to “go home or celebrate”. They were completely sure that the “banana” would still be there the next morning.

This meant that the tabloids stopped being enablers to become real players of the game with power to decide because the “deciders” left the “manning” up to them.

And we had a clear indication how much their role changed by the way they treated Brown before, during and after the 2010 elections:

In Brown’s time they were dedicated helpers but with Cameron they became deciders.”

“Yes, but Brown and Cameron are far too big to be involved in the Maddie Affair, at least directly!”

“Yes, not only will I not dispute that, as I’ll agree with you. I’m just trying to reinforce the fact that after 1,000 days the BHs’ “Centres of Decision” were populated by different people from those in the beginning of the conflict.

Both by the comfort felt by the “initial team” that things were being done well as in the fact that the tabloid media gained another relevance that it didn’t have with the former government.

And that’s the third thing that happened.”

“What thing?”

“The THIRD thing that happened was there was there was a change of Government in the UK. Brown out, Cameron in.

This had two consequences. The first is that it changed all the links and connections of the Dark Cloud “Guests’ Nepotistic Network”.

Mind you, these links and connections didn’t change because of the Maddie case. The case was but one of many “board games” that were being played then and are being played as we speak and will be played in the future.

Nepotism adapts to the circumstances quickly, so the change of any government in any country means a rapid adaptation of all ongoing nepotistic networks.”


“The second consequence is that all those within the British Government who had handled this subject when it was really HOT were now replaced.

Those who had direct interest in the issue when they had worked so hard to contain it and had put their names at risk, were now being replaced by those "just" inheriting a problem, and not directly involved in it, so although the interest was maintained the engagement wasn't the same. Besides, the Maddie issue was dwindling away as "planned"

With the change of the nepotistic connections to the new government so also changed, in the GMW, the connections to the "monkeys" in control of operations. Not for the better, nor for the worse. They just changed.

For example, a "monkey" A, who used to connect with person B on a certain subject in the beginning of the conflict, began now to connect about the same issue with person C.

"Monkey" A stopped connecting with decider B but started to connect with decider C."

“Continuing to be logical.”

“The FOURTH thing that happened in those 1,000 days was the effects that the intangible value of the McCann “logo” had on the BH camp.

“The what?”

“Not talking about the logo of the good marketing ploy that exploited Maddie’s non-existent coloboma. I’m speaking about the McCann name itself.

It became a true household name.”

“Yes, it did… but that meant what?”

“It meant that the all 9 people that made up the "T9" were quickly incorporated into the single “the McCanns” term.

If one is to speak about Maddie to anyone, the McCann name will pop up but if one is to ask with whom they spent their holidays the best answer one will get will be a vague “their friends” or maybe a “their doctor friends” if the person is more versed in the subject. They won’t be able to tell how many friends there were and much less any of their names.

The consequence of this concentration on the McCanns was that it provoked a natural bitterness from the other members of the group. If in those first months the T9 had very little to say about their own fate, the T7 had even less.

We know that all that friendly patting on the McCann’s back were more like daggers than anything else, but to ignorant eyes they were meant to appear as heartfelt tokens of friendship.

And the T7 were as ignorant as the rest of us about the BHs intent.

And bitterness why? Because they saw that the McCanns were getting protected and they weren’t. That the McCanns had very expensive legal help and they had none. That the McCanns were the “Teacher’s pet” and they were left to play alone in the schoolyard.

Here, David Payne becomes a pivotal character. Irrelevant of what happened in the early evening of May 3rd. The subject we’re discussing here and now is the GMW and not about what happened on that day."

“Right. Go on.”

“You must take into account that the McCanns were newcomers to this sort of event but other T7, namely the Paynes, weren’t. We make this assumption based on the fact that it was Payne who organized the "tennis" holiday.

Making a judo analogy, imagine that all those who participated in the event in PdL were ranked according to their “swinging-belt".

The colour of that belt wasn’t obviously attributed in accordance with the number of times one participated in these sort of events but of an accumulation of social relevance, participation and trustworthiness.

This meant that if you didn’t have the required social status, the best that you could ever ascend to would be to brown swinging-belt. The black swinging-belts and the black swinging-belts with “danswere reserved to those who were significantly important.

Gerry's "F-Off, we're not here to have fun" rant suggests that they weren't exactly off to a holiday but either to work or to some initiation rite

PdL's Ocean Club has shown that it had the most diverse facets of entertainment and otherwise such as tennis, various watersports and even visits to water parks, but  although having the most sought after poolside bar in the world we're still to hear anything about having conference rooms or any other facilities where collective working meetings could take place. 

If it had, I imagine that the use of PdL's Church wouldn't have been the one we all witnessed that particular Summer.

So with the "not here to have fun" we can safely assume the McCanns didn't go on a work trip but the rant is consistent with the anxiety felt by those being "initiated" into something. We believe it to be into a very restricted upper-class swinging group. 

This means that the McCanns were just white-swinging belts, at least in an event with the "importance" as the one that took place at PdL, while the Paynes’ swinging-belts were already blue or even brown.

We have no idea what colour to attribute to the swinging-belts of the other T4. What’s important to remember is that with the Paynes’ unhappiness, other blue/brown swinging-belts present within the Guests also became unhappy.

This will be important when I’ll speak about the Black Hat Gangs.”

“What Gangs?!?”

“With time the BHs disaggregated between themselves but I’ll talk about this another time. Not today, another time, ok?”


“Back to our “swinging/judo”. The first thing that happened the moment Maddie died was that the swinging-belts stopped to being swinging-belts."

"They did?"

"Yes, because from that moment on, the swinging stopped being the alternative lifestyle being practiced to become the secret to be hidden

So all the belts stopped being swinging-belts to become BH-belts.

This change also happened because very soon people who had nothing to do with swinging were summoned to help solve the problem. These people, who were relevant deciders in the process, were BH but not swingers.

What colour do you think were the BH-belts “worn” by those who made up the initial “BH Decision Centre”?"

“The highest ranking ones, obviously... black with the highest number of “dans ?”

Exactly. And it was maintained that way during the first crisis days of May 07. As the Guests’ Nepotistic Network Dark Cloud grew in size so it grew with the number of "dans" of the BH-belts of the deciders who incorporated it.

If in the beginning you had 1st and 2nd “dan” black BH-belts, when “The McCann Hunting Party 07” was recalled you had more of the sort of 6th “dan” and up only in the BH “Decision Centre”

That doesn’t mean that all the white / yellow / orange / green / brown and black BH-belts didn’t remain active. They and their families were the first concerned that the PdL Secret remained exactly that, a secret.

So they populated the various blogs and forums with various nicknames where, keep in mind, ONLY the characters INSIDE the nice and neat white picket fence were to be discussed. 

That's why you had that surprising high number of people who seemed to support the McCanns no matter how evident the evidence was against them!

It was at this level, the “low status-coloured-BH-belts” that things started to desegregate between the BHs.

To the Payne "resentment" one has to add the public humiliation that Jane Tanner was subjected to in the Mockumentary by "Billy-the-Kid" himself, or as he’s known, Gerry McCann.

The intra-fights between the BHs weren’t public like the pretendy” “WH” cat-fights. But they existed. And were fierce and ruthless.

With the “monkeys” taking over daily operations, so did the importance of “low status-coloured-swinging-belts” grow in the various blogs and forums.

You had an almost victorious BH “Army” that was highly fractured on the  inside. The BHs were far from being as united after 1,000 days as they had been at the beginning of the conflict."

"See your point."

The FIFTH thing that happened was theme-saturation."

"I'll wait for the explanation..."

"In these 1,000 days the Maddie issue became really cumbersome to Britain. It became a non-grata topic to be absolutely avoided in any conversation.

The embarrassment could physically be felt whenever a Brit had to strike up a conversation with a non-Brit. The silence about it was terribly patronizing.

The handling of the Maddie issue was harming seriously UK's image externally. Even if not mentioned, as it wasn't, the subject was there, in the background, an omnipresent shadow of institutional shamelessness.

So, with the entrance of the new government, led by David Cameron, there was a true hope among the general public that it would end this Maddie scandal once and for all, and the McCanns would finally face the music!

So the FIVE things to remember that happened in the first 1,000 days are:

ONE, the topics discussed, by around only 5,000 people, had basically strayed away from the McCanns to “WH” intra-fighting;

TWO, there was a power shift, from the “scientists” to the “monkeys” so that those in the BH Centres of Decision weren’t the same people who were there at the beginning of the conflict;

THREE, a change of Government in the UK meant that the Nepotistic Network had to adapt quickly and the connections between the BHs and the politicians changed or were in process of changing;

FOUR, the BH Camp was crumbling from the inside with bitter fighting between the various factions;

FIVE, Britain was tired of the Maddie issue and was really looking forward for it to end. 

This is how things were at 1,000 days of GMW. Got it?”

Loud and clear, Ma’am!

“And that is when Textusa launched the GMW’s Pearl Harbour.”

“Yes, you did speak of that yesterday…”

“Yes, I did, and I’ll leave it for tomorrow, if you don’t mind.”

“But you said…”




Post Scriptum:


  1. These vacations for social progression and future turned terror.

    The meeting center for strategies and perhaps phone calls and sms was the Church. Not forgetting Father H. who knows a lot, very probably .
    In the silence of the PdL Church also thinks in silence ... and with this silence private we have 6 years of stories.

      The Thy assumptions point to a exhaustion of this case but only at the summits.

  2. Bom dia!

    Hoje aprendi uma expressão idiomática; claro que tentei a ajuda da..... pesquisa:

    Monkey business = esta expressão normalmente é utilizada quando queremos fazer referência a atividades ilegais ou secretas.

    Estes diálogos entre o Fred e a Textusa são deveras interessantes, além de arrumarem os meus pensamentos acerca de anos de " história" .

    ( embora, por vezes, um bocado difícil para mim acompanhar os raciocínios e desenvolvimento das conversas) .

    Parece então que no post de hoje ainda estamos a meio de 2010....

    Realmente é verdade. Reconheço que o lançamento público dos ficheiros da PJ foi uma estratégia muito bem conseguida; ninguém estaria à espera disto ; quase uma boa bofetada com luva branca.

    Quanto a G.A. , sem dúvida que a Sua postura é de uma extraordinária força, coragem, frontalidade e boa formação de carácter. Claro que sempre estive e estarei preocupada com este Cidadão de Portugal.

    Para mim, a frase que melhor o define é " A Justiça funciona em silêncio".

    Obrigada por mais este post , o qual vou tentar reler o mais possível . As segundas e terceiras...... etc. leituras mostram sempre mais dados para assimilar , mais descobertas.

  3. Well done, once again.
    I don't know from where you keep coming up with this but Maddie must be very grateful to have the fortune of someone like you picking up the issue. She's finally getting the respect they took from her.
    You say something that I found particularly interesting and have to agree with you: the Tabloids.
    The were created to put out trashy news. When it came to Maddie they became the front-line for the first time in history about a global subject. They way they treated had a counterproductive effect. They treated like they did with all other news they were used to report. With basic language, sometimes insulting, for basic people to read. Only this time there weren't basic people on the other side. There were people that took offense. I think the miscalculated consequences on the part of the tabloids are responsible for this all to end the way Justice meant it to end. I'm not an SY hopeful because I've understood they dragged the Met into the scam. But I think that they have little to where to run. Truth, I believe, will soon be known.

  4. The power of the tabloids happens in UK and PT. Madeleine is used by both for profit but also, as here warn us, conditioned and follow direction that they want.

  5. Again a very intelligent post touching the "mouche". The 1000 who remain fighting for Maddies rights were so resilient and made of so high quality that they become the most feared enemy for Mccann's and BHs. They will never have money enough to hire suficient lawyers to stop the Internet highway. Their source of money will drie before the 1000 resistents go away. What a condemnation....having to live under that shadow and knowing exactely what will be the consequence of having that 1000 resistents- the return of the millions who went away feared by the electrical shocks they never experienced but got scared because of the megapropaganda created by some tabloids who sold the Mccann's and their helpers as untouchable.

  6. E ainda estamos no período de 2007 a meio do ano de 2010! O famoso 2010!

    Se foi tudo uma imensa jogada de amigos então pode dizer-se que os iniciados dos Judocas de UK tinham amigos bem colocados ,os quais até vieram a Lisboa para assinar qualquer coisa mas, se o caso fosse impedido não?

    Eu vou ter de esperar pelos próximos posts……

    Eu começo a perceber que para tudo o que se passou desde 2007 é preciso paciência de .... inglês.

    Por cá,costuma -se dizer " é preciso a paciência de Chinês" .

  7. Tex, this is one post hard to savour. But like any well prepared gourmet dish, after being savoured one only wishes there was more.
    Look forward to where you're leading us.
    I thought you set yourself the bar way too high but you haven't failed yet and I hope you don't.
    I doubt that there are many blogs who are as "dense" as this one and have a constant stream of visitors like you have.

  8. One of the best examples to show how scientists work to control the monkeys- Mccann's V Tony Bennett

    How many lawyers working for Carter-Ruck in a single case?
    How much money spent in salaries in a single case?
    Now emerged that a queen Counsul was also appointed to help Carter- Ruck defend the parents of a little girl, who don't want the crime of their daughter discussed/ investigated on any way, and send to prison a pensioner, who just refuses to follow other monkeys and keep his mouth closed.

    This could be funny, if we are on the cartoons world. The complete unbalanced money and legal experts on each side, made history and show another side of that game which per si could strenght the power of the monkeys- the Mccann's are desperate and the BHs as well.
    Joana Morais blog is being assaultad by some BHs, who are not confident anymore on their way to condemn GA and TB but still condemning them and defending the couple and their strategies on the ground that they cannot be charged because nothing can be proved. Some question JW as a witness and the Smiths sight.
    Some monkeys have done a good job, not easy to chip the monkeys brain only with propaganda and the shadow of a legal libel. Monkeys have brains and need to be convinced to believe.
    Even with all that lawyers and money, they fail to convince the monkeys.
    I hope TB won the case and contributes to the end of Carter-Ruck and their nonsense clients.
    Who is paying all that? Could not be the Fund only?

  9. Good day.

    I agree with the assessment made by anon 7.

    This Blog demonstrates autonomy and a huge difference. The Blog is very objective, based on the files and content analyzes of about what the press seeks instill to the public. . The blog seeks to reflect and deduce from the real facts and objectives. So, in my opinion, this team takes us further away.
    The posts are written but along with the comments, the reader can almost be in the presence of the authors. And is the "talk" that people will understand to exchange ideas or questions.

    Good day!

  10. Eu encontrei uma coincidência ou,não acerca do período 2007/2010.

    Costumo ler as notícias possíveis na banca dos Jornais. Uma notícia acerca de uma pessoa chamou a minha atenção. Consegui fazer pesquisa, num determinado diário e, apareceu-me um gráfico sobre o período mais fértil em que essa pessoa mais apareceu nas notícias. O pico de " popularidade" coincide com o período destacado deste post

    I found a coincidence or not about the period 2007/2010.

    I often read the news of possible at the newsstand Newspapers. A news piece about a person caught my attention. I was able to do research in a given journal, and appeared to me a graph on the most fertile period in which this person appeared in more news. The peak of "popularity" coincides with the period outstanding this post .

    M.P. tem o maior pico de aparecimento nas notícias precisamente no período 2007/2010.

  11. Bem, quanto ao comentário do anon 8 sobre a presença de Adrienne Page Q.C. no silenciamento a TB , faz-me lembrar as presenças apressadas de M.P. por cá em determinadas sessões de Tribunal. E, se não vai, escreve.


  12. Interesting comments I’ve read about this post on MMF. As they don’t see fit to come here and express their opinions, I think appropriate for me to express my opinion about them here:

    Opening comment:
    “Is it just me or did anyone else lose the will to live?

    “I'm not sure if I've ever understood anything from Textusa!
    The sheer length of it makes it very difficult to absorb.
    An orange at Christmas for anyone who can summarise the content of the blog in one paragraph! “
    (Not Born Yesterday)

    “It made me decide that I had urgent shopping to do! “

    “Many years back I had the privilege of being educated by a very wise sociology lecturer.
    Here's what he said about writing essays, reports etc:
    1) Say what you're going to say.
    2) Say it.
    3) Say what you've said.
    Good advice - remembered to this very day. “

    “Sorry but i think some of these bloggers have become consumed by their own prose and are gradually disappearing up their own backsides.
    May as well just call it 50 shades of Maddie. “

    “I agree. (with Lioned) She/he had some good post, like the driving out from PDL, and then it got all very strange when it started: all people working in Mark Warner (and half of PDL?) were involved in cover up..that was the point I gave up.

    Lioned must be speaking about himself. To make a comparison between Textusa’s words with EL James who has sold millions worldwide is paying her a BIG compliment, not insulting her. Not realizing that is to already have disappeared up a backside, quoting Lioned’s elevated words.
    People who complain about Textusa’s posts lengths (we know why you do that…) make me wonder how they can discuss anything about Maddie. I mean, the PJ Files are not an easy piece to read! Take the Tapas rogatories for example.
    They say they’ve read the PJ Files but when it comes to Textusa it’s a “oh, no it’s too long! Please summarize!”
    I think Textusa is quite succinct. She tackles many issues in a single post and interlinks them in such a way that it all becomes perceptible.
    But there are some who can read at MMF:

    “I posted and my post went whoooooosh
    I have read this piece 3 times and imo it is an excellent piece and I urge you all to take a deep breathe and try, even the monkey business. The part about the swinging is something that has been discussed previously but on this latest piece it makes a lot of sense. “

    “Long winded for sure, but very, very true, think it is a good piece!

    “worth struggling with! “

  13. Anon #12,

    I remember reading there a poster say that when s/he reads Textusa her/his eyes would start to bleed after the first paragraph!
    Common tactic to steer away people.
    To almostgothic the "privilege of being educated by a very wise sociology lecturer" apparently didn't produce results. Teacher's fault?

  14. lol........ anon 12 e 13.

    Para mim só é complicado pelo estilo literário escolhido. O que é um direito dos autores.

    Mas, é tremendamente simples a leitura. Vejam primeiro as conclusões e elas estão precisamente a partir daqui:

    " So the FIVE things to remember that happened in the first 1,000 days are:..."

    A conversa entre o Fred e a Textusa é coloquial. É uma conversa! As Pessoas dialogam assim. As questões são colocadas pelo Marido e, Ela vai respondendo e explicando tudo até chegar à conclusão .

    Mais uma vez a conclusão do post está toda aqui:

    " So the FIVE things to remember that happened in the first 1,000 days are:..." Portanto é ler pois até estão bem discriminadas.

    ONE, the topics discussed, by around only 5,000 people, had basically strayed away from the McCanns to “WH” intra-fighting;

    TWO, there was a power shift, from the “scientists” to the “monkeys” so that those in the BH Centres of Decision werenʼt the same people who were there atthe beginning of the conflict;

    THREE, a change of Government in the UK meant that the Nepotistic Network
    had to adapt quickly and the connections between the BHs and the politicians
    changed or were in process of changing;

    FOUR, the BH Camp was crumbling from the inside with bitter fighting between the various factions;

    FIVE, Britain was tired of the Maddie issue and was really looking forward for it to end.

    This is how things were at 1,000 days of GMW. Got it?”

    Já há muito tempo que leio o fim de cada post pois assim percebo a conversa. Nessa altura leio tudo e, até releio.

  15. Anon 12.
    I went onto the forum that day and read exactly that.
    It was after reading Textusa and then the comments against her that made me realise there is only one blog on the subject I am going to visit in future. Not even check into any others out of idle speculation or hope for a miracle.

    It is so easy for the monkey mind to take hold and for all objectivity to be lost and we would be left floundering in a sea of toxic wash.
    I am going to go back to the beginning of this blog.
    To the very first posting you made and follow it till where we find ourselves.

    I don't know who you are Textusa and sisters but I am completely in awe of your intellectual prowess, powers of observation and refusal to get called into the marquee of speculation and titbits.

    I agree with an above poster who wrote that Maddie was very lucky to have you put your attention to her story and its sudden ending.

    With these last two posts of yours, something within me has lifted. The manipulation has passed its sell by date. It is all coming to light.

  16. The latest spin from the Black Hats.
    If you haven't read it yet, please take a seat because it will blow all the wind out of you:
    "Carter Ruck have insurance that would pay out if they lost."
    Yes, read it again. You read it right!
    I'm sure that Jose Mourinho and Sir Alex Ferguson must have the same insurance for every time Real Madrid and Manchester United lost!!
    They could play as badly as they wanted and still make money!
    Any court action has a possibility of being lost.
    It's such a stupid notion to say otherwise and anyone stating it is just making such a fool of themselves.
    Damage control for forthcoming loss?

  17. Su,

    When reading our earlier postings please take into account that there are some things, fortunately not many, that we no longer believe in.

    We were no different from the majority in being intoxicated by a brilliantly managed propaganda.

    We could delete some posts but opted not to do such because only leaving things as they were written, with the conviction in which they were written, can it be evaluated how the blog evolved through these troubled times.

  18. And they continue, and guess by who?

    “It really is a ridiculous piece of writing. All I understood was the Monkeys bit, don't know if I am right but I saw it as the Press. the 1st Monkey...the Express got a shock because the Tapas 9 won their libel case and were awarded almost £1 million between them. . This acted as a deterrent to the rest of the Press until they were so subdued they only wrote good things about the McCanns.”

    “You got further than I, Panda.
    (End Is Nigh)

    “Totally agree. (with Lioned) Why not state the point and leave it at that?”

    “I think Textusa is with the Fairies to be honest TEIN, her writing never used to be like that and her members will drift away if she doesn't realise how ridiculous her posts are.
    BTW, I do occasionally get flashes of intelligence even though I'm as thick as two planks when it comes to understanding how a Computer works.”

    Oh, Panda, how you wish for your ridiculous prophecy would happen: “her members will drift away if she doesn't realise how ridiculous her posts are”!!!

    Unfortunately for you and your mates Textusa’s ratings are having a tendency to grow right before your eyes. It’s seems people enjoy her “ridiculousness”.

    By the way, read the Great Maddie War post. It wasn’t “almost £1 million”. It was £375,000.

  19. Anon #16,

    I think lawyers/solicitors can be insured against their clients not paying their fees, I would imagine that would apply win or lose. They don’t insure against losing the case.
    For a lawyer/solicitor it's a safer option to defend themselves against the possibility their client doesn't have any savings to pay them.
    This means if CR are insured, that insurance is to guarantee that they get paid by the McCanns.
    It’s getting so ridiculous the rubbish they are trying to heap on Mr. Bennett to make him crack but it seems to be having the opposite effect and supporters are coming out of nowhere to offer words of support.
    Mcs are not able to ask for a suspension of the hearing as that would confirm they have completely backed down.
    This is like Custer’s last stand. There is nothing else on the horizon to silence dissenters with. Do CR feel foolish yet? Probably not, it’s mega bucks for them whatever happens although it may not do their reputation, perceived as invincible, any good. Still it wouldn’t be difficult to spin that one.

  20. Anon 19,

    If Mcs lose, they could be made to pay costs, including court fee and opposing lawyers charges. They could take out the insurance premium, paid by them or lawyer. It covers them, not lawyer, who would bear the cost of losing the case.
    This is my interpretation, so I may not be right.

  21. Anon 18,

    A friend of a friend has told me that Panda is now good friends with the friend of Mrs Fenn’s friend. You know that friend that Panda made on a flight who just happened to be the friend of Mrs Fenn’s friend. I believe in my friend as much as he believes in his friend, you know, the friend of my friend that told her, my friend and not Panda's new friend who was the friend of Mrs Fenn's friend, all about Panda’s friendship with the friend of Mrs Fenn’s friend. After all who would tell a friend a lie? It’s a fact the friend of my friend is a friend of my friend! And lying to my friend wouldn’t be very friendly, would it?

  22. I love to read Textusa. We Portuguese have a saying “Só faz falta quem cá está” which means “Only those who are here are missed”.
    If you find Textusa too hard to read, don’t try, just don’t blame your inability on others. The ignorance resides in you, not Textusa.
    If she says something you don’t understand, ask, don’t call her ridiculous.
    If she says something that you don’t agree with, discuss it, and you’ll see that Textusa will respond. You may not agree with the answer but that’s called discussion.
    If you just stay in your own make-belief world sulking because what she writes is a problem to you that you can’t logically counter it, then don’t come here. Or comment about it elsewhere. If you continue to come here just to go to some kind of “Insane’s blog” to detract Textusa it can only be because the cap, or Black Hat, fits you.
    When I read Textusa I have this feeling that I’m infiltrating deep into enemy’s lines. Whenever Textusa posts it’s like she’s guiding us behind the enemy and we’re stealing their “clutter ammo”!

  23. Unpublished Anon
    Jan 29, 2013, 3:36:00 PM
    Feb 2, 2013, 5:17:00 PM

    Please take your theory to a blog which would welcome it or publish it on your own.

    Thank you

  24. Who asked in a previous post, why Textusa is not mentionned in other places? Seems not very well informed....
    Based on the posts from anon 12 & 18, looks like MMF changed the main subject of their worries from Madeleine to Textusa.
    They complaint about the lenght of the posts, about the complication of the language. Will come the day they will assume or pass the message they are completely "def" to avoid understand the obvious.
    You are on the right track Textusa, since long ago.
    A sign of the new time.... looks like Marinho Pinto is ready to leave the lawyers Bar.

  25. Anon 22, eles percebem muito bem. Fazem-se de burros de propósito porque não lhes interessa perceber o que não lhes convém.
    Panda, é uma velha joia que parece preocupar-se demais com o que se diz aqui. Sobretudo porque se faz passar por alguém que conheceu num bus de aeroporto, uma amiga de uma amiga de Mrs Fenn. Deve ter sido mordida pelo mosquito responsável pela "Fennistia" porque há muito que dedica o seu teclado a escrever contra quem ousa desconfiar do papel de Mrs Fenn na tragédia de Maddie. É uma preciosidade que se enterra cada vez que tecla.

  26. The talks in Portugal in McCanns v Amaral - Carter-Ruck's version of events Jill Havern Forum

    (available at Mccannfiles)

    Eh! Eh! We can see the strategy. They can't surprise us anymore. Assuming that was ID and the Mccann's who proposed the deal? NEVER, NEVER.... So ridiculous.
    If was not ID and the Mccann's, who could be? A witch directly from the dark world, under the supervision of the clairvoyant MAC. Carter- Ruck falling, falling.... Trapped on their ridiculous strategies.

  27. Dear Readers,

    Up to now this hasn’t been a “murder story” and we sincerely hope it will never become one.

    However referral to my death in real or facetious terms such as treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humour, is typical of the sort of BH we are dealing with.

    People who when faced with their actions rather resort to violence than to ownership of what's evident.

    This is a comment we have received:

    “Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Monkeys In Business":

    Seriously, if your husband was to murder you and hide your body under the patio, there would be a queue of people waiting to tell the judge you drove him to it with these fucking ridiculous posts

    Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at Feb 2, 2013, 10:28:00 PM”

  28. THE spinners of the dark arts are doing all that they can do.
    With that in mind I command the White Christ Light and the Violet Flame of Protection to be with you and your families.

  29. Bom dia!

    O anon do dia 2 de Fevereiro, escondido por baixo da capa do anonimato, vem aqui e deixa uma idiotice que apenas está de acordo com ele mesmo.

    anon das 10:28 de 2 de Fevereiro : andas a brincar às escondidas?

    Se fosses Gente , vinhas sem a capa do anonimato. E, não venhas brincar para aqui pois este espaço não é própriamente o jardim infantil da tua zona. Cresce! Cresce e educa-te.

  30. Can't you just feel by his/her words the sheer terror that the Feb 2 10:28 person must be living seeing his hideout being progressively exposed and waiting for truth come knocking on his/her door exposing him/her for the hypocrite s/he is?

  31. 30: o que eu consigo sentir, para além da hipocrisia, é uma falta de maturidade muito grande. O cérebro da criatura não dá para mais e, despeja idiotices. É um ser demasiadamente limitado.

    A iliteracia deve ser do tamanho da pequenez do anon das 10:28, dia 2.

    O dito anon ( macho ou fêmea) tem dificuldade em ler e em interpretar um texto simples, portanto não sabe sequer comentar os posts aqui colocados. É portanto um/a incapaz.

    Mas, suponho que devemos andar para a frente e comentar em relação ao caso de Maddie com todos os envolvidos.

    Na minha opinião, não são só das Ilhas Britânicas. Na minha opinião, cá também os há.

    Fiquemos sossegados à espera dos desenvolvimentos da negociação pedida pelo casal. (Espantoso, este aspecto) e, quem sabe se os de cá proMcs não terão vergonha . A pedir desculpa....... não os vejo a fazer. Porque o descaramento vale tudo nestes 2 molhos de gente.

    Bom domingo.

  32. Num acordo há cedências ou, não. Para já o casal de UK tem de negociar com 3 Empresas e uma Pessoa. Pode haver acordos mínimos, suponho. A minha dúvida, e receio, é se o silêncio, após a negociação pedida pelos mccann para evitarem ir a Tribunal, virá a fazer parte de alguma cláusula.

  33. 32, confesso que será uma enorme desilusão para a maioria dos portugueses, se GA, TVi, Valentim de Carvalho e a Guerra e Paz cederem a qualquer negociação com os Mccann. Depois de tudo o que fizeram a Portugal, não mere em qualquer negociação e espero que nenhum português procure os serviços dos advogados que os defendem.
    Infelizmente há portugueses que não gostam da policia e usam este caso para tentar denegrir a imagem da policia em geral, mesmo sabendo que GA e a PJ fizeram um excelente trabalho.

  34. Unpublished Anon,
    Feb 3, 2013, 2:00:00 PM
    Feb 3, 2013, 2:05:00 PM

    Yes, the "please take your theory to a blog which would welcome it or publish it on your own" was addressed to you.

    What we do or won't do is for us to determine. What you do or won't do, is, obviously, your decision.

  35. Para anon 33 de anon 32:

    Concordo consigo. E, concordo quanto aqueles que , por razões particulares, fogem da Justiça a 7 pés e, dizem mal da PJ e de GA.

    Mas quanto às Editoras e quanto à estação de TV nem sei, pois ID tem fama de perita na área da comunicação social.

    Com a crise, as Editoras e a TV....... não sei não.

    Quanto a GA não vou pôr-me a adivinhar. Ele merece respeito e sabe o que fazer.

    Quanto a contratar os advogados dos mcs e companhia ilimitada , no que me diz respeito, não há esse perigo. É preciso muito dinheiro e só quem o tem , pode ter acesso às estrelinhas cá do burgo.

    Alguém me consegue informar quanto à distribuição dos DVD dos ficheiros distribuidos a 4/8/2008 :

    se é costume em qualquer caso;
    se foi uma excepção;
    se foi uma estratégia para calar os das Ilhas, sempre doidos por não haver conferências de Imprensa?
    Terá sido o Minist. Público? Quem terá proposto?

  36. Anon #30,

    The comment from Feb 2, 2013, 10:28:00 PM is beyond pathetic.

    It's sad. It's pitiful. It's desperate. It certainly from someone who wishes Textusa never picked up a pen.

    A pen is mightier than the sword. On Textusa's hands a pen is mightier than a "WMD"! Bless her and her team!

  37. Eu não sei se já disse isto aqui:

    Quando eu falo com populares, com gente do povo, sobre o caso de M., todos me dizem acreditar na Investigação da 1ª Equipa e, quanto à morte escolhem a causa menos sofredora, digamos assim, o excesso de comprimidos, na morte acidental.

    Como ocorreu a morte, só os que lá estavam presentes é que saberão
    ( provavelmente).

    Desconfio que jamais saberemos, mesmo se houver acordo.

    Gostei de ler o resumo destes imensos dias- a época de G. B.

    Agradeço cada post.

  38. Unpublished Anon
    @ Feb 3, 2013, 6:15:00 PM

    Which I suppose to be unpublished Anon
    @ Jan 29, 2013, 3:36:00 PM
    @ Feb 2, 2013, 5:17:00 PM
    @ Feb 3, 2013, 2:00:00 PM
    @ Feb 3, 2013, 2:05:00 PM

    In fact I overlooked that it wasn’t your theory but your persistence in trying to shove it down our throats seems more like it was your own, or at least that you have a very close proximity to its author.

    General Kurt Gebhard Adolf Philipp Freiherr once said:

    “I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers.

    Usually two characteristics are combined.

    Some are clever and diligent -- their place is the General Staff.

    The next lot are stupid and lazy -- they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties.

    Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions.

    One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent -- he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.”

    As you seem to have some difficulty in understanding my words let me try and be absolutely clear. this blog will not sponsor in any way someone diligently working on something stupid.

    So, I reiterate that you please take your or your friend’s theory to a blog which would welcome it or publish it on your own.

  39. My congratulations Tex, you are really getting under the skin and near the truth and its showing. Your detractors cannot string a coherent argument together, so as usual resort to personal abuse on other sites.

    Russian Doll has been trying (Feb 1st) desperately trying to make us believe the Macs were very safety conscious stating they waited for car seats at Faro Airport, only trouble is, read Dianne Webster's statement.

    "I don't think we did manage to get all the children a seat in the end, so we just sort of risked it and drove from Faro to P d Luz".

    Risked it with childrens lives, says it all. Inspector Frost thinks you are barking mad, uses latin names but cannot spell.

    Have no fear there are those of us who greatly enjoy your site, don't necessarily agree with all of your conclusions, but love the mental challenge. You must be close, for them to attack the way they do.

  40. The mystery is solved. The person you kept telling them to post is Russiandoll who has really vented her spleen on JH.

    This is what I wrote is on the GMW post "There’s an ongoing discussion on twitter between evident clutterers that states that M died in Portugal early and they got another guest to use his daughter as a substitute!!"
    (Jan 28, 2013, 7:44:00 PM)

    There's more but that is the essence of the comment. I maintain every single word I wrote. If the person contacting you was trying to only to " but I am criticised for defending his right to his conclusion !" it's very strange to defend the honour of someone she doesn't know so fiercely with at least of a dozen attempts here. And then go whine over at JH!

    Let me just ask Russiandoll this? If I work hard on a theory that the world is only 2000 years old, would a scientific journal publish it just because I worked hard on it? I'll answer for her: no.

    Of course the same set vultures/hyenas came out of nowhere to detract how long and unreadable your posts are and that LATELY (wonder why?) you've gone bonkers and stopped making sense!!!

    Please continue! You have them running around in circles to find out how to counter you, and they can't!!

    My question to Russiandoll is a rhetorical one. I've read all I need from the character.


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.