Topic: Alternative Knowledge

[monkey424]

Previous posts:

9/11 - Summary of What Happened and How it has Been Covered Up	Link here
Alternative Knowledge Topic #1: Origin of “Conspiracy Theory”	Link here
Alternative Knowledge Topic #2: Wikipedia	Link here

I don’t know why our great and powerful moderator keeps locking these threads.

One conspiracy thread at a time is enough. If you want to offer these points as arguments, you can do so in the other thread.

That “other thread” is a cesspool of muddled-up information, which is why I wanted to start fresh.

And let’s not forget the word “conspiracy” is CIA propaganda. Or did you miss that point completely, Snarky?

This thread is about knowledge. Pretty simple.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“A study of history shows that civilizations that abandon the quest for knowledge are doomed to disintegration.”
- Bernard Lovell, British astronomer and writer.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me preface this by humbly saying that I am by no means an expert on the controversial subjects that I’m attempting to bring to light. Conversely, I think it’s safe to say that those participating in the discussion (if given a chance to do so) are no more an expert than I. I’ll freely admit that I can be naive about some things and I don’t know everything. However, we all have blind spots – everyone – and anyone claiming to “know better” is fooling themselves. The only way you can know ANYTHING and to have a constructive discussion is to talk about facts and evidence, with lesser emphasis on views, opinions, theories, and so forth. Talking about history is good but be wary that history is written by the winners and truths tend to get buried. Arnold Rimmer from Red Dwarf alludes to this point here.

[embed=425,349]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGISD6UmXxo[/embed]

I am in the process of learning (or re-learning as the case may be) and posing here not just to share information but also to consolidate my own understanding of ideas and issues. I’m not trying to be a guru or anything like that, and I hate being in the spotlight, but I guess I’ve taken on this role because I feel it’s important. The world as I see it now is one of complexity and deception on a scale like we’ve never seen before. I was born in the early 80s and therefore did not really experience the end of the Cold War (I was only 6 years old when the Berlin Wall fell). Growing up in the 90s, the concept of war seemed like distant history - a thing of the past, not the present. To be fair, I was aware of war on some level as one my earliest friends was from Lebanon and had experienced war as a child before his family relocated to Australia. But other than stories from abroad, life in Australia was pretty sheltered. I’m telling you this to give you an idea of my background and level of experience and knowledge. Those who live abroad (particularly those in non-Western countries) may have a better idea or at least a different perspective on some of these issues.


Alternative Knowledge Topic #3
Ideological Subversion

“Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.”
- Winston Churchill

Continuing with the theme of intellectual terrorism, the role of intelligence agencies comes into question. How much do you know about them? Bear in mind it might be a skewed perception of what they actually do. It gets even more complicated when you consider that individuals within the intelligence agencies themselves might not even be aware of the full picture. The idea of disinformation and double-agents adds yet another dimension to the tangled web of intelligence. But before we get too excited and start thinking about potential adventure game plots, let’s attempt to separate fact from fiction.



One thing that you may not know about the KGB was its role and primary function relating to psychological warfare during the Cold War. According to former Soviet agent Yuri Bezmenov, only 15% of the KGB's time, money and manpower was devoted to espionage and covert activity, the type typically glorified by Hollywood in the form of James Bond-style flicks. In actuality most of the KGB’s resources (the remaining 85%) was spent on a four-step process called "Ideological Subversion".

According to Bezmenov, the aim of Ideological Subversion was to change the perception of reality to such an extent that, despite an abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their family, their community and their country. The goal was to weaken a country, strip its culture and corrupt their values to a point of complete vulnerability. It’s a great brainwashing process that goes very slow.

The four steps in the process are:

1. Demoralization.
2. Destabilization.
3. Crisis.
4. Normalization.

Here is a short snippet from an interview with Bezmenov from the 80s.

[embed=425,349]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX3EZCVj2XA[/embed]

Here are some longer videos, specifically:

1. The longer version of the interview in which Bezmenov talks about his life working for the KGB in India and how he escaped / defected to Canada (here).
2. A 1983 lecture on subversion to an American audience (here).

Whether you accept this guy as legitimate / relevant or not, he does present some compelling ideas and should make you wonder if subversion currently infiltrates Western society. I would argue that it is does, quite blatantly, and it is not necessarily the Soviets or any one group pulling the strings.

[Jack]

The agenda of this film is clearly based on the recently resurrected "red menace" narrative. Propaganda and fear generation of this type is the only authentic form of terrorism that is being perpetrated on the western world.

Even so, I recognise some parts of the described process as true, from my own experience. For instance, Demoralisation: It's a simple and easily verifiable fact that by far most countries have a privately operated central bank which creates currency from thin air, then lends this currency to the government and the people with interest. Because the only source of currency comes with interest, this creates an ever-growing debt which can never be repaid. Most people believe that their central bank is part of the government. Why do they believe this? They do not know. Someone told them this, they know not who or when. That's propaganda.

The fact is that the governments, like the public do indirectly, regularly lends the money they need to operate from the central bank. The taxes that the government collects are not used for government operations, but to service the debt that is created by this form of currency creation. The profits for this operation goes to the owners of the central banks, which are invariably private banks. All of this is verifiable via wikipedia or the mainstream media. When you're telling someone this, after providing these WP/MSM links as if feeding an infant, they will say: "What is the problem? This is just how finance works." That is demoralisation. In other words "the facts tell nothing to him."

And let’s not forget the word “conspiracy” is CIA propaganda.

The word comes through French from the Latin conspirationem, which means: "agreement, union, unanimity"

It's the phrase "conspiracy theory" which has been implanted to so effectively cause people's brains to jump to holograms and UFOs when they sense anything that fits this category. Implanted how? Ask Dr. Judy and Alex Jones. They are doing the implanting.

We don't have to wonder or discuss whether the western world's culture has been/is being subverted by propaganda. Here comes the airplane! Open the hangar! Bzzzzzoooowww!

Operation Mockingbird: "Operation Mockingbird was a secret campaign by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to influence media. Begun in the 1950s, it was initially organized by Cord Meyer and Allen W. Dulles, and was later led by Frank Wisner after Dulles became the head of the CIA. The organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA's views, and funded some student and cultural organizations, and magazines as fronts. As it developed, it also worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns, in addition to activities by other operating units of the CIA."

Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media (The Guardian)

How the spooks took over the news (Independent)

The CIA’s Mop-Up Man: L.A. Times Reporter Cleared Stories With Agency Before Publication (The Intercept)

When a military boot crushes his--THEN he will understand. But not before. That's the tragic of the situation of demoralisation.

[SilverSpook]

What's interesting about the Bernie Sanders campaign is he's making most of the Alex Jones talking points that were "Conspiracy Theory" fifteen years ago.  New World Order cabal of billionaires, Global banking cartel controlling America and basically 1% being bastards and destroying the health, income, and lives of the rest for profit.  Except this guy is neck-and-neck for the Democratic Party's Presidential ticket with Empress Hillary Clinton.

It's nice to see that the alternative truth is becoming the mainstream truth.  It's telling when Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein calls Sanders, "A dangerous man" and "A threat to us all" (subtext: he's going to pull a Louis XIV on our* financial, if not literal heads). 

*The Royal "Our" - as in the Kingdom of Wall St.

I'm right now listening to CNN smokescreen on about Sanders lack of experience warmongering in the Middle East and other bullshit quibbles, and it's hilarious.  Still waiting on the million-dollar war-chest contribution from Goldman Sachs for Hillary giving a pep talk to the Wolves of Wall Street.  Lol.

[monkey424]

Thanks Jack Lucy and SilverSpook for contributing.

Just a quick note on Alex Jones. I did mention him in an earlier post. Snippet here:

Spoiler: ShowHide

People may be familiar with alternative media personality Alex Jones. He is well known for sensationalising conspiracy theories with his special blend of hysteria and salesman like rapid-fire speech. He will cover most conspiracy stuff, but will avoid Dr Wood's work like the plague! He won't acknowledge her work and becomes irritated when anyone tries to bring it up on his radio show. This audio clip is most revealing (here). And this one (here).

Also, the topic Jack raised concerning central banks and perpetual debt is of particularly importance and interest (no pun intended) and I was actually planning it for a future post.

But for now, the next topic I want to cover relates to the last one on subversion; specifically media subversion. Media of course now comes in a variety of forms and flavours, but the mainstream media will always attract the largest audience. It should come as no surprise that mainstream media, and even alternative media to some extent, is a monopolised and controlled entity.

I know from personal experience in China that mainstream media is controlled and conditioned for a mainstream audience. Alternative news is virtually inaccessible (for both natives and foreigners). YouTube, Wikipedia and Facebook are all blocked. One thing that my Chinese father-in-law tends to do when visiting Australia is to access online information that he can't in China. In regards to information access, the West in comparison appears to be the opposite; we have a dizzying abundance of information rather that a lack thereof. The mainstream is still controlled (perhaps more subtlety) but alternative news is equally compromised, existing as a minefield of information that only a few will attempt to navigate to sort the good info from the bad (the latter comprising disinformation and propaganda, deliberate or otherwise).

Alternative Knowledge Topic #4
Buried by Mainstream Media: The True Story of Madeleine McCann

A series of documentaries made by independent researcher Richard D Hall examines the facts and evidence surrounding the tragic story of Madeline McCann, the child allegedly kidnapped in Praia da Luz, Portugal. Those in Portugal may be more aware of the alternative narrative of the Madeleine McCann case, which is certainly not what UK (Western) mainstream media has told us. Not only does Richard D Hall expose mainstream media for what they really are - propagandists - but he also reveals who is controlling mainstream media and their connection to an overarching hierarchy involving the UK government and intelligence agencies.



The initial documentary consist of four films:

(View full documentary here).

1. The Initial Storm

The first film revisits the scene of the crime, the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, where Madeline was allegedly kidnaped. Many anomalies of the case are highlighted, including a highly suspicious crime scene, improbable and contradictory statements from the MaCann's and their friends, as well as changing stories relating to their account of events. This led the local Portuguese police to initially conclude that the whole event was fabricated. The film focuses on the swift reaction of UK mainstream media and identifies a central figure, Clarence Mitchell, as being instrumental in media manipulation and control over the issue.

2. Dogs Don't Lie

The second film covers some of the most compelling evidence of the case. The Portuguese authorities engaged expert sniffer dog handler, Martin Grime, to deploy two sniffer dogs in the Praia da Luz holiday apartment. One dog was trained to detect the former presence of a corpse; the other the presence of blood. The dogs respectively detected the smell of a corpse and blood in several locations in the apartment, as well as on clothing and belongings, and even in the boot of the MaCann's hired car.

3. Private Investigations

The third film delves deeper into the organised cover-up of the incident, of which Clarence Mitchell was instrumental as mentioned earlier. We are also introduced to other key individuals and their role in facilitating the cover-up, partly through the use of dodgy private investigation agencies. A tangled web of diversion and lies is unravelled, one bogus story after another.

4. Government Agents

The forth film continues exposing the increasingly bizarre cover-up which, as inexplicable as it may sound, ultimately ties to UK government and intelligence involvement. One may roll their eyes and wonder why on Earth government agencies would be involved with what should have essentially been a foreign affair, like many similar incidents no doubt are and remain so. The reason for the high level cover-up is not clear, and the film does not attempt to provide a definitive reason beyond stating that one must exist. However, the film does allude to a possible link to paedophilia, something evidence points to intelligence agencies being involved with as a tool of manipulation.



The Phantoms

(Documentary here).

This supplementary documentary made by Hall addresses the alleged kidnapping scenario. Numerous sightings of a man were reported to the police on different dates following Madeline MaCann's disappearance. This film examines the credibility of these sightings by looking at police witness statements, media reports and other evidence. After a thorough and extensive examination of all this evidence, the most likely conclusion is laid bare for all to see.

[Danvzare]

Ah, the Madeleine McCann case.
I remember when that first came on the news. My first thought was "the parents did it", and my only reason for such a thought, was because they weren't upset. Parents (at least one of them) are always upset years after such a traumatic event. A few days after such an event, you can bet that they'd be crying.

Many years later, I eventually looked into it, and guess what I found. So much damn evidence pointing to them. As a matter of fact, almost everyone in Britain thinks they did it! (Or at least everyone I've ever talked to.)

Still, it's always interesting to hear about it.

[Retro Wolf]

@Danvzare If one of my kids were kidnapped I'd be absolutely destroyed.

We've had the whole Madeleine McCann story shoved in our faces for years in the UK, It's died down recently but after such a long time I doubt we'll ever found out what happened to her.

[miguel]

I live 30 minutes from Praia da luz and the MCann case is very clear now as it was from the beginning. 
Not that I know things that nobody knows but we're talking about a small village where everyone knows everyone.
The man in charge of the case was put away as soon as British detectives came into play. Why?  Because he soon found that the parents could be guilty, he was not sure but tried to investigate further.
If you ask any Portuguese they will tell you that the girl wasn't kidnapped.
Sadly I believe it was a case of a dramatic accident involving the girl who died because of it.
I am sure the parents were excellent parents... Until the accident, better said, right after the accident.
It takes guts to call the police and admit you have hurt your daughter.  They didn't have it.
The political implications that put Portuguese authorities against the wall fearing British retaliations allowed Scotland Yard to completely overrun our investigation and the result is equal to zero.
Rip Madeleine.

[Ali]

I remember when that first came on the news. My first thought was "the parents did it"

There's a reason we think like this. It makes it easier on us, because we don't have to empathise with parents who've lost a daughter. If they did it, they're not victims, they're guilty. How convenient! It's the same with so many half-baked conspiracy theories - sorry cases of 'alternative knowledge'. They are like superstitions, ways of achieving a sense that we can understand and maybe control confusing reality. They also reveal our paranoias and prejudices. How far do you have to walk down any of these avenues before a Zionist cabal pops up? Not far.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann, or exactly what happened at the Boston Bombings, 7/7 or 9/11. It's interesting to speculate about 9/11, and that's because it means we don't have to think about all the people who burned to death.

[Danvzare]

I remember when that first came on the news. My first thought was "the parents did it"

There's a reason we think like this. It makes it easier on us

You make it sound like I actually care about what happened to that little girl. I really don't.
My reasoning for thinking the way I did, was more out of a disconnected sense of reality, where I merely saw a mystery to be solved. Much like on a TV Show.
I really don't care about what happens to other people, so long as it doesn't affect me (either directly or indirectly).
Yeah, I'm selfish. But at least I acknowledge it.

[Calin Leafshade]

[Monsieur OUXX]

Ugh.

[Mandle]

I remember when that first came on the news. My first thought was "the parents did it"

There's a reason we think like this. It makes it easier on us

You make it sound like I actually care about what happened to that little girl. I really don't.
My reasoning for thinking the way I did, was more out of a disconnected sense of reality, where I merely saw a mystery to be solved. Much like on a TV Show.
I really don't care about what happens to other people, so long as it doesn't affect me (either directly or indirectly).
Yeah, I'm selfish. But at least I acknowledge it.

What you have said here makes me very curious and I must ask a few questions:

(A) Are you trolling?

If not then:

(B) Do you think that these are only your own personal feelings or that everyone feels this way?

(C) If the former then: You probably already realise that you might have a condition called "Sociopathy"

Spoiler: ShowHide

Sociopaths are interested only in their personal needs and desires, without concern for the effects of their behavior on others.

(D) If the latter then how can you possibly trust any other person and/or form any kind of friendship or relationship while believing that the person in question cares in no way about your well-being unless your well-being benefits them in some material way?

(E) In either case, doesn't such an outlook make you feel very isolated and lonely?

[Danvzare]

Nope, I'm not trolling.

I don't think everyone feels the way I do. After all, what Ali said about it making it easier on us, is generally true of most people.

I really don't think I'm a sociopath.
My reason being is because I care about my friends and family. Because as I said, I only care about things that affect me either directly or indirectly.
If some guy I don't know gets murdered, I don't care.
But if my mother's friend (who I don't know) gets murdered, I care, not because it affects me directly, but because it affects me indirectly through my mother.
I feel happy when people I care about are happy, so I try my best to make them happy, unless it's at the cost of my own happiness, in which case it depends on whether seeing them happy would leave me happier in the long term than not doing whatever the task was.

And does it make me feel isolated and lonely?
Heck no.
How is not caring about someone who I never met and probably would have never met, going to isolate me?

And now I've just realized I wrote that I don't care about what happens to other people...
I should have written that I don't care about what happens to other people I don't know.
Damn...
Well, I guess that's what you get for not being specific enough.

[Mandle]

And now I've just realized I wrote that I don't care about what happens to other people...
I should have written that I don't care about what happens to other people I don't know.

Yup, that would be the bit that knocks you back down from a sociopath to just a 21-year-old...

[LimpingFish]

I don't care about what happens to other people I don't know.

Empathy can be funny like that. It's nothing out of the ordinary.

[Monsieur OUXX]

Back on-topic: the very basics of conspirational thought is to pay attention to insignificant details while ignoring the big picture, hence producing goofy theories.
This thought justifies itself by the fact that "curiosity is good" (which is true), that "it's small details that produce the big result" (which is also true), and that "in the past there have been cases where nobody was believing the outsiders but they were right in the end" (yes, all of that is true)

BUT

it's too vague. One cannot justify their claims with vague assumptions like "what if I was right? It's possible that I'm right. Once a thinker said that I must continue my search for truth as long as there's even just 1% chances that there is a mistake". Yes. But not if you ignore the big picture.

As a well-known example: "jet fuel cannot melt steel beams". Well yes it's true. Rock solid truth. It seems to be that small detail that invalidates official investigations on the plane crashes. And then someone will build a whole theory around this hard fact: they imagine that maybe it was all faked by some higher intelligence.
...EXCEPT they're ignoring the big picture. They'r eignoring that steel doesn't need to reach its point of fusion (to melt entirely) to start bending. Far from it.
In other words: they focus only on the tiny details that confort their goofy thories and don't search for the relevant details.


What I really can't stand with that sort of thinking is that it's undermining the whole principle of scientific thinking while sounding like it's strictly following it. That sort of flawed scientific thinking says that the researcher must not omit any detail. Well yes, that's true. Scientific thinking is fundamental. But don't forget that in real life, you never have all the data. You must constantly infere some truths. You cannot start an experiment thinking "OK, but what if we're in the Matrix and none of this is real?" No. You must admit that ... reality is real. In other words: you must cut the bullshit and sort out the facts. If you don't have this skill then... It's sad but you're not capable of critical thinking.

========

PS: If you haven't read the book "Foucault's pendulum", then it's a perfect example of what I'm describing. The whole book is a made up story of a guy who's a specialist of medieval symbols (starts a bit like Da Vinci Code). The book shows how all the symbols in history are connected (because, well.. a triangle shape stays a triangle shape. In other words: it doesn't mean that everyone who uses a tiangle shape is connected to the previous guy who did the same 100 years before).
But the twist of the story is that, in the end, it turns out that all the symbols are actualy connected. That there is a secret society throughout history who actually does use these shapes on purpose, and they have a meaning.
My point is: every normal person understands that this book is a story. It's just the author having fun, using his knowledge of symbols. But I've seen people who actually believe all these things, and who think that the author was trying to prove them!!!

[monkey424]

Did anyone watch any of the Madeleine McCann documentaries? The point of the documentaries is not so much to know what happened to Madeleine, but to expose the mainstream media for what they really are - nothing more than propagandists, feeding lies and disinformation to the public and ultimately confusing the whole issue so no one knows what to believe! The documentaries look at the facts and evidence of the case, basically nothing you would have heard about in mainstream news (unless you live in Portugal perhaps).

   

The very basics of conspirational thought is to pay attention to insignificant details while ignoring the big picture.

First of all, there’s nothing wrong with “conspirational thought”. Conspiracies (as in the false-flag / naughty-government type) have happened in the past, which allows us to project that they can happen in the future. That’s right - you are allowed to think like this. But be wary – as I’ve highlighted previously, there is an active effort by the powers that be (let’s call them the military-industrial-intelligence-media complex) to not only ridicule conspiracy theories but to create them in the first place! It’s a type of subversion.

Take 9/11 for example. There is a truth to 9/11, and it’s certainly not what we have been told by the lying mainstream media or so-called experts. The official mainstream story falls apart so easily – one most glaringly obvious thing is the lack of a conventional explanation (with classical physics) by any academic, professional or government representative for how the twin towers disintegrated in about 10 seconds on 9/11. The NIST report does not address this, nor any other official U.S. government report. In addition to this, we have controlled opposition. This is an active effort by certain individuals whose agenda to supress and distort 9/11 truth by diverting our attention away from evidence and instead focusing on insignificant details and ridiculous theories that are easily dismissed or disproved (individuals such as Richard Gage, Steven E Jones, Niels Harrit, Jim Fetzer, Dimitri Khalezov, etc). See my previous posting here.

So what is the truth? Fortunately, for 9/11, it is KNOWN – and is available for those who want to know it. It’s an unpopular and ugly truth, but truth none the less, and supported by a shitload of evidence!

This thread is about knowledge. Not speculation, emotional reasoning or theories. Just facts and evidence.

Evidence = truth = knowledge



---

Madeline McCann

I was hoping Miguel would join the discussion.

The man in charge of the case was put away as soon as British detectives came into play.

That man was Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral, who wrote a book about the incident. I believe the book has been translated into several other languages – except English. Here’s a website on Amaral:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id241.html

---



When Madeline Died

(New documentary here).

This is the sixth doco in the series, just recently uploaded to YouTube.

The past presence of a human corpse was detected in the McCanns’ apartment and in many other places associated with the McCanns by highly trained police sniffer dogs. This clue suggests that Madeleine may have died and her body lain in the apartment for a period of time. Assuming this is correct, what date and time did Madeleine die? The most logical way to address this question is to go back in time to determine the last piece of credible evidence which proves Madeleine was alive. This film attempts to do this by forensically examining witness statements, photographs, physical evidence, police reports and media reports. In doing so the film exposes the agenda of the mainstream media which has, on the whole, helped to cover up the truth about the Madeleine McCann case.

[Danvzare]

Take 9/11 for example. There is a truth to 9/11, and it’s certainly not what we have been told by the lying mainstream media or so-called experts. The official mainstream story falls apart so easily – one most glaringly obvious thing is the lack of a conventional explanation (with classical physics) by any academic, professional or government representative for how the twin towers disintegrated in about 10 seconds on 9/11. The NIST report does not address this, nor any other official U.S. government report. In addition to this, we have controlled opposition. This is an active effort by certain individuals whose agenda to supress and distort 9/11 truth by diverting our attention away from evidence and instead focusing on insignificant details and ridiculous theories that are easily dismissed or disproved (individuals such as Richard Gage, Steven E Jones, Niels Harrit, Jim Fetzer, Dimitri Khalezov, etc). See my previous posting here.

So what is the truth? Fortunately, for 9/11, it is KNOWN – and is available for those who want to know it. It’s an unpopular and ugly truth, but truth none the less, and supported by a shitload of evidence!

So what's this truth about 9/11 then?
Because looking on the internet will only ever find me stupid theories such as "It was an inside job!" and "Jet fuel can't melt metal beams!"

So what's the truth then? That the building wasn't built to code? That a jet liner smashing into a building whose outside is mostly glass, will result in it collapsing almost instantly? That the government knew terrorists were going to steal a jet liner and crash into that building, so they intentionally placed bombs inside the building to create mass hysteria, just so they could have more security in airports?

You know what I think the truth is. The media did it, so that they could rake in a fortune by never shutting up about it.

[Mandle]

What kinds of masterminds of conspiracy are these people that can pull off these amazing feats of worldwide deception and yet be exposed by anyone with internet access?

Or if, monkey, your point is that the media often spins the news according to its own or the government's agenda then:

DUUUUUH!!!

Of course it does. Still doesn't mean there is some master plan behind the whole deal... It's just humans doing what they do best: Condensing an insanely complex world into easily digestable myths we can read over our morning coffee and think of as real.

[miguel]

Good morning folks,
Wise man Mandle talks about myths and how they are still embedded in our lives. Well the media are the ones who construct myth in a organised way for the global population, they are the immediate scribes of our time.
And frankly are not responsible or to blame for the accuracy of the facts. Does this sound controversial?  Yes in the rush of a front page they can be irresponsible but that's the price we pay for liberty.
Filtering content is something we should all be doing and while at it try not to fall on the same rushed mistakes the original message brought.
The MCann case is as old a tale as any pulp novel could be, it has all the right ingredients and stereotypical characters like the high- mid -class doctors family with their friends spending holidays in the sunny south, the lone wolf detective, the low profile village, the Scotland Yard and even a hint of a diplomatic incident.
Because we know, better, because we have it engraved in our group conscience how to use this information it becomes natural to format opinions that are most likely already been written many times before.
We tell the same tale again and again.

Therefore my opinion is doomed to stay on a Internet blog if I had one, although like I said on my previous post, the general Portuguese and specially local opinion is that the events that lead to the poor girl dying were baffled by the status of the family. How much "influence" can some British doctors have over a until -that -point credible institution like the Judicial Police is something a little scary for me, but thats my personal opinion.