Madeleine McCann - a wide angle versus a microscope

I've written this for the sake of all those people who find themselves fascinated/mesmerised/unable-to-look-away from the Madeleine McCann case. I intend to be the very opposite of all those Madeleine forums you've been participating on. Whilst this may sound cryptic, the meaning will be perfectly apparent by the end of the piece.

First things first - forget all the details: who behaved how; who sat how many metres from whom; what was found in whose car ...all that stuff. The more details you've got and the closer attention you pay them, the less you're capable of standing back and viewing the big picture. It's like pressing your nose up against Seurat's Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte - all you get is dots.


A useful starting point is to remind ourselves of the bleeding obvious - Madeleine McCann's story was HUGE. Even here in the Antipodes, on the far side of the world, it was front page for weeks and the Australian press took every AP and Reuters update there was. It was all-Madeleine-all-the-time, and no detail was too small. But curiously, in this blizzard of details, the big contextual aspects were considered unimportant. For instance, the fact that Portugal had just gone through the sprawling Casa Pia paedophile scandal (roping in senior members of Portugal's clergy, police, judiciary, and government, and this exactly on the tail of Belgium's massive Dutroux scandal) was not deemed as worthy of our attention as a blurry photo of a peasant girl. Um... okay.

Straight away we're bumping up against what you'll find is a constant theme: details - good; big picture... what big picture?


Doubtless there'll be pedants banging on the table saying that there's no link between Madeleine and Casa Pia. Sure, of course. Not that they can possibly know of course. But to hell with them - I'm actually making a different point. And that is - How could this be ignored? You'd think that a desperate media, keen for every story connected or otherwise, that sends its crews out to interview someone/anyone - "Well, we didn't know them but they seemed very nice and we're all quite upset" - you'd think they'd have latched onto the Casa Pia story with both hands and hysterically shouted, 'Holy Shit! Portugal! Paedophiles! Abduction! Scandal!' ...wouldn't you? This is the media we're talking about - hysteria is their middle name. And yet, in spite of having seen every Madeleine snippet for however many weeks the story ran for, I was completely unaware of Casa Pia until I found it on the internet a year later.

If one of those aforementioned table-bangers wants to tell me that Casa Pia did-so-too appear in the media, pointing to this article / that article, why don't we cut to the chase and do the old advertising 'hallway test'? This is where we duck out into the hallway and ask whomever is there if they remember Madeleine McCann. Prompts are permitted - 'You know that little blonde girl that was abducted in Portugal'. Then we ask them about Casa Pia - 'You know that scandal that happened just before the McCann abduction that involved Lisbon's biggest orphanage with trails leading to politicians, police etc?' I'd lay odds of 100-1 that the former will score over 90% recognition and the latter will be lucky if it even makes 5, no wait... 1%.

Go figure. The media prefers their scandals small. It's easy to puff 'small' into whatever size you want. Scandals that were HUGE to begin with - hmm... hard to control. God knows where they might go. Best just to leave it out.


So what am I saying? Am I hinting that the media was somehow in on the whole thing? Gee, the thought occurred to you too did it? Well, you'd have to wonder wouldn't you? But let's not! Let's just continue with that zooming-out big picture thing. Never mind a singular overview of the media by way of the McCann abduction - it's just one event. There have been many, many such scandals and it's not so difficult to compare. The bible for this is Dave McGowan's The Pedophocracy (technically this is the first six chapters of his book Programmed to Kill). Straight off - anyone who's interested in Madeleine McCann and hasn't read The Pedophocracy doesn't know anything. Sorry for being so blunt but it's a fact. There's a link there, go read and come back. Or you can just carry on and read it later, it's all good. If you've half a mind to skip it, let me state as earnestly as I can, The Pedophocracy WILL blow your mind - I guarantee it.

The six chapters look at half a dozen massive paedophile scandals: Dutroux in Belgium; the Franklin/Boy's Town scandal; the Presidio/West Point military childminding scandal; the McMartin preschool scandal; and last but not least the perfectly mind-boggling bust of the 'The Finders'. First up, the most singular thing about each of these headfuck scandals is how HUGE they were. They were the kind of HUGE that makes the Madeleine McCann case look scrawny.

Sure enough the media worked its magic and each of these scandals was rescripted, recast, and all shot through a blurry vaseline lens. The parents had dreamt it all! And all their churlish dreams had sprung from seeds planted in their heads by wicked attention-seeking social workers. The mother of that five year old, whom she'd picked up from day-care to find blood running from his anus, wasn't a victim. She was a troublemaking paranoid schizophrenic drunk who had undoubtedly caused his 'red bottom' herself. And she'd led all those other parents to imagine the abuse of their children too! How dare they accuse all those upstanding childcare centre staff! The fact that all the children's stories matched, that they still hold to them as adults, and that all of it was borne out by indisputable evidence was proof only of the perverse obsession of the parent's desire to blacken the good name of undeserving innocents. Bloody Parents! Have they no shame?


How then to portray a scandal like the Finder's Bust? That didn't spring from complaints from parents but rather from the police arresting two well-dressed men with a van full of kids, aged 2 to 7, all of whom were unwashed and without underpants, just as you'd expect for 'gifted' children being taken to Mexico for 'special education'. But the thick plottened when their Washington headquarters were busted. Paedophiles with headquarters... wow, who knew? And the Finders had two facilities... double wow.

There police found not only: shelves full of jars containing urine and faecal matter; a bloody altar surrounded by video cameras; and so many photos and videos (of both porn and satanic ritual) that they needed garbage bags to haul them all away, but also: computers and telexes with orders from all over the world specifying particular 'looks' for children all of whom, one presumes, were to be kidnapped and trafficked overseas. In addition to all this were procedural handbooks detailing how to infiltrate child-minding centres and how to traffic children whilst avoiding police attention. (Hmm... perhaps they should've read that last one a bit more carefully). And may I draw your attention back to the preceding sentence again? 'Procedural Handbooks' - think about that. Who makes 'procedural handbooks'? Individuals and amateurs? Or professional organisations?

Oh! Did I mention that the entire investigation was completely shut down with a single click of the CIA's fingers? It seems the Finders' leader, Marion Pettie, had been CIA since the days of the OSS. And not forgetting his spook wife and spook son. Faced with the obviousness of the Finders as a total CIA gig, the media refused to touch it at all apart from a solitary article in the US News and World Report assuring us that whatever it was the Finders were up to was "eccentric, not illegal". Oh yeah? What was in those videos? Whose names were on the order forms? And was that human blood on the altar? We'll never know and the media will never ask.


So. We've zoomed out to half a dozen scandals. Fine, let's hold that wide-angle but now search for commonalities. For mine the winner of any whose-name-pops-up-the-most competition would have to be the extraordinary False Memory Syndrome Foundation. Says the FMSF - whenever anyone remembers any stories of childhood abuse (paedophilic, satanist, whatever) it's a false memory that has been planted in that person's head by wicked social workers who are possessed of an irrational hatred. They're just like anti-Semites except they hate child minders and other innocent people.

Because the FMSF's mission is so worthy they have seemingly limitless funding with a chapter in nearly every US state. Their dedicated staff is kept busy flying all over the world testifying for just about anyone accused of paedophilia. Says they, it's the accused that are the victims, and it's the accusers who should be in the dock. They are perfect one trick ponies. And what with presumably having paid google, any search for any of the above-mentioned scandals will often as not deliver the FMSF's version of it (or possibly that of their sister organisation the Institute for Psychological Therapies) first and foremost.

If none of this makes sense, all you need to know is that the FMSF is almost entirely staffed with 'ex'-paedophiles, 'ex'-CIA heavies from the MKultra mind-control programme, and people who would be more accurately described as 'both'. Oh, and 'False Memory Syndrome'? There's no such thing. They just made it up.


If you're feeling a little breathless, a bit like Neo in the Matrix when he discovers the truth of the world he's in, you should know that we sympathise, we really do. It happened to all of us. It just is what it is and you can either keep going, or blink and go back to that virtual steak - it's up to you. But should you wish, between the links provided here and the links provided at each of those, your understanding can follow that branching process until it fills the sky. Very little will escape you.

But what has all this to do with Madeleine McCann? Okay, here is what I know as a cold hard certainty - so huge is this pedophocracy disinfo effort that what with the mainstream media all singing from the same songbook (or not singing as the case may be), there is no way the internet will be spared. And certainly not in regards to the biggest story there is: Madeleine McCann. Thus the various Madeleine forums and usegroups you frequent will have, beyond a shadow of a doubt, at least one fully paid-up and completely dedicated member of the pedophocracy whose sole job it is to make sure that no one gets near the big picture. They may be in the comments, junior, senior, whatever; or they may be the moderator; or they could even have their name right up there in the masthead. Oh, and loners are a rarity, particularly on dedicated sites. Tag-teams are infinitely more likely. The mere fact that a fellow has others agreeing with him increases the weight of that opinion by orders of magnitude. Three? Four people? No problems. We've seen it all before.


Remember - Madeleine McCann was HUGE. The thought that the likewise huge pedophocracy could ignore it and stand back with their fingers crossed hoping that ever larger numbers of people don't wake up to them is an abject impossibility. Remember - they founded the FMSF for no reason other than to convince us all that we shouldn't pay any attention to any crazy stories.

It's an unpleasant fact that full time disinfo merchants hang out pretty much everywhere that free discussions take place. As God is my witness. If you find that too unlikely it's only because you haven't challenged one of them yet. Do that and they give themselves away. It's a long-ish read but if you want to see what a paedophile disinfo spook in action looks like, stevieb provides a salutary lesson. You can actually see me wising up in real time.

And how about the sites you've been hanging out at? Have you ever had cause to wonder at certain dominant people over at the forum you frequent? Would I be right in thinking that they are heavily into blame-the-victim? Do they hate discussions that frame the whole thing in terms of the big picture? Are they big on disinfo buzz words like 'hoax', 'hysteria', 'witch-hunt', 'debunked' etc? Do they link to the FSMF or the IPT and use them as 'debunking' reference points? Do mentions of Dave McGowan have them recoiling like vampires to crucifixes?


Here's something you can try - post a link to this article smack dab in the middle of your favourite forum. There's nothing in it for me you understand. We're just conducting an experiment to see what happens. Just so you know I'm not just making this up, here's Su in the last comments (and actually the inspiration for this piece. Hi Su, smiley winky thing)

As you are aware I have been on several forums for almost three years regarding Madeleine. An eternity ago you said be careful her parents are not guilty it is the paedophocracy. (In my recollection I wasn't quite that definite - ed nobody)

And I was convinced I knew better. I had been spending hours on these forums with some brilliant posters each splicing over the events and concluding lies, lies and more lies.

And we stripped the parents bare, they killed their child of that there was no doubt. And there was an intelligent army of us believing it.

A few days ago a fellow poster was posting about child abuse and Operation Ore and she got banned. Banned for fcuks sake. And then I posed a different question - I asked whether there was a possibility she had been sold to a high powered elite pedophile network. Some fucking pervert abusing the most famous child in the world - again and again - imagine what a thrill that would be. But I did not say that I just said it was a possibility that she did not die in the apartment as alleged by the cop and then posted a link to the aangirfan thread on Haiti.

For the first time ever they deleted the link - declaring it offensive and without validity.

When I went to log in this morning I found my account had been deactivated.

I have come to the conclusion that these places that are meant to be finding out the truth of what happened to this child are manned and controlled and indeed manipulated by a small handful of people - who find what aangirfan says is too close to the truth.

E voila! And that's how it's done. And... that's all it takes. You just have to raise the topic and they give themselves away. So, who's up for it? Do any of you feel like doing battle? Most excellent. Take no prisoners and remember nobody's rule - If they've got the game, they may as well have the name. Godspeed and do pop back in and tell us how you went yeah? All the best.

---

Oh! And any paedophile disinfo spooks out there turning all kinds of purple apoplectic: Well, what are you waiting for? Pile in! The comments are below. Bring your buddies. Bring your straw men. Bring your pissweak bag of tricks. I'm your man and I'll eat you for fucking breakfast.


Hmm... sure enough you can't very well stomp in here and declare who you are. I recommend a kind of tut-tut approach, if you know what I mean, variously tempered with disappointment, anger, exasperation, that kind of thing ...just to break up the mood etc. Flings at my intelligence, sanity, sobriety are also good. Here's what a rather obvious bloke said the last time I mentioned Madeleine:

Anonymous said...
What a pile of bullshit. You obviously don't know anything about what you are talking about.

It's not great is it? Surely someone out there can do better than that? Don't be shy now! Show us what stern stuff kiddy-rapists are made of. We can't wait.

---

Post Scriptum - In the comments below Sabretache provides a link to Joel Van Der Reijden's excellent ISGP which was the website for Dutroux, the Dutroux witnesses (X1, et al), as well as a thorough takedown of Le Cercle, the 'Pink Ballets', and the entire edifice of European ruling class satanistic paedophilia. Unfortunately that link is dead but thankfully the site is cached (by Sabretache himself no less) and can be found here: Wikispooks, ISGP cache.