We have now written many posts on the Smith sighting. We have absolutely no doubt in our minds that it was an intended encounter. Smithman walked deliberately into the Smiths when he had plenty of time and opportunities to avoid them.
No one is able to judge what others decide in situations in which they see themselves put in. The same person can react differently in similar situations, differing only in state of mind between circumstances.
But there’s something called instinct. Saying that everyone withdraws their hand from a flame is not being judgmental but realising fact. As we are being factual when we say Smithman would have done all he could to avoid crossing with the Smiths if he was carrying a compromising (dead or abducted) child in his arms.
And because he didn’t avoid the Smiths when he could have perfectly well done so as we have shown, we have stated that this encounter was completely intentional on Smithman’s part.
Today, we are going to take that intention a step further. We are going
to show that Smithman didn’t simply walk intentionally into the Smiths. He waited for
them. He literally ambushed them.
The relevance of the so-called
Pool Photo, best known as the Last Photo, has emerged again, with a
theory sent to the Attorney General of Portugal by CMoMM group, authored
by Peter McCleod, known in the Maddie internet world as PeterMac.
terms of authorship, even though it’s said that it was from a group of
unnamed researchers both British and Portuguese, the only other name that
has appeared is that of Paulo Reis, although it’s uncertain if he was a
researcher/translator or just a translator.
The article that caused the Last Photo to emerge again did not meet the expected impact or relevance its authors hoped it would have by far. For them it must be a huge disappointment.
By suggestion of our friend J, this week we have decided to make a post
of the 28 questions that we put to Anon in our post “Very important concessions”.
They were addressed to Anon (please forgive the aggressiveness below but as you know, then we thought you were Insane) and he has replied. We now invite all the paedo-theory believers to answer them (we will not put into our usual italics as it constitutes the entire post):
More in hope than
expectation, we waited to see if Gemma O’Doherty would produce a
follow-up to her unexpectedly thin, in terms of new content, article in February, on the Madeleine
We have shown that in terms of importance it’s really thick and has caused shock-waves that are still rocking the underground in this case.
As we thought, it wasn’t intended to be the first of
a series and nothing more has been written or tweeted by Gemma on
this subject. However, there is something we hope she will consider if
she ever decides to revive her interest in the subject. Or rather,
In it we have shown how Walkercan1000, Insane’s character as the other side’s top Twitter minion, had been helpful in letting us understand what had happened in the Maddie case when Gemma O’Doherty announced she was going to publish an article about Maddie on Jan 7 and which she did so on Feb 3.
There’s only one certainty about Gemma
O’Doherty’s article on the McCanns published on paper edition in the Village Magazine, on
Saturday, Feb 3 2017, “Maddie: did the BBC bend the truth?” (published online today, Feb 9 at 14:17) and which is best expressed in a popular
Portuguese expression: the mountain gave birth to a mouse [a montanha
pariu um rato].
We were not going to publish anything this week. Simply for personal reasons.
However, we could not let pass without giving an opinion, however short – and it will be very short – about Gemma O’Doherty’s investigation to be published in the Village Magazine later this month.
About the magazine we would like to highlight what a reader of ours has said about it:
“Anonymous 10 Jan 2018, 16:39:00
I think it's important to point out that Village Magazine is a professionally printed magazine which is available in retail outlets, news-stands, etc. It has been around since 2004 and prides itself on investigative journalism. And attempts to sue it have been made on numerous occasions. Please see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_(magazine)”
About the investigation itself we will say that we consider it an important event and will not say anything further so as not to influence it in any way.
We would like to make it very clear that we think that Gemma O’Doherty is an absolutely independent journalist – from what we have read about her, we think that is something she’s very proud of – so we are, again to be very clear, not implying she’s playing any game within the game.
We will just say she’s a mass of air about to flow through the board.
She can be from a gentle breeze that will simply refresh the pieces on the board to a full tornado that will throw them all about.
What sort of flux of air she will be, we will wait to see if it will be Hurricane Gemma or a passing breeze.
What we have seen is some quickly reaching for scarfs and coats. That, we must say, has pleased us.