Lying in the Sun

A Load of Who Shot John

 A Load of Who Shot John

Never ceases to amaze me - and particularly so in light of the horrific events which led to the tragic death of Brenda Leyland, events involving the collaboration, and hounding of/by Martin Brunt (at the helm) the lowlife that is Jim Gamble, and his cohorts the despicable Summers and Swann duo, working with, and funded by Sky's Murdoch, and a mob of vicious online vigilantes, the McCanns/Mitchell also having full knowledge of what lay in store for this lady, and who together with newspaper columnists, Carole Malone, Lorraine Kelly and others of that ilk, behaved absolutely disgracefully, playing their part, being involved to greater/lesser degree in these events.  Each and every one of them in their own foul and inhumane way, contributing in launching of attacks against this lady Brenda Leyland, and/or adding their nasty, vindictive tuppenceworth, all of which was not true.

These people, in their sick minds, planned meticulously, and over what must have been some weeks or months, how they would go about attacking Brenda Leyland.   Think about that for a moment. The magnitude of what they did.

This lady was not guilty of any crime, but the aforementioned persons, decided she was.  In their sick minds, they tried her, found her guilty.   Not stopping at that, they meted out what they considered, and taking the law into their own hands, what they deemed was a suitable punishment.   Think about that!  The magnitude of what they did.

Then think about the UK press, how they not only demonised, and wrongly so, this lady, but who then trivialised her tragic death.   Not a one apologising for wrongly condemning this woman, sending her to her death, and there is no question that their actions were a contributory factor.
Brunt made no public apology.
McCanns made no public apology.
Gamble made no public apology.
Murdoch made no public apology.
Summers and Swann made no public apology
Carole Malone made no public apology
Lorraine Kelly made no public apology (and did not apologise either for the lies she printed about Dr Amaral)

Seems these people are in their comfort zone when they print their venomous lies, but not a one of them has the guts or the integrity to stand up and say - 'I got it so very wrong.  What I did was so very wrong. I regret my actions, regret that I treated Ms Leyland as I did contributing to the loss of her life, it will haunt me always.'

They all carried on as though nothing had happened!

Their collective actions cost Brenda Leyland her life.   Their collective actions caused devastation for her family.  No words strong enough to adequately describe the gravity of their actions, the grief and hurt they caused Brenda Leyland's sons, her friends, family and loved ones.  For these young guys, to lose their mom just awful, but in such a way, hounded to her death, is utterly heartbreaking.

For the Kelly's, the Brunt's, the Gamble's, the Malone's, the Murdoch's, the Summer's and Swann's and the McCanns and Mitchell's of this world, the online vigilantes, to have played a part in this attack/the plans to launch the attacks/have prior knowledge of the intended attacks/be attached, involved in any way, attacks, which led to a human life being lost, and none of them to show remorse, sums up the type of scum that they are.  In fact, the online vigilantes rejoiced!   You cannot get any lower in life than that, these people who communicate with and support the McCann family.

And the ever drooling, dope that is Lorraine Kelly, who has made so many false statements, lies in fact, in her column, and in defence of the McCanns and their buddies, the fool as usual, could not help herself.   She had a column to fill and she clearly cares not how she fills it, be it with lies, mischief, hounding of an innocent woman, driving her to her death - makes no difference to Kelly.  Checking out facts before going to print, producing fair, honest, level balanced articles concerning the truth of the McCann case - would never cross her mind!  Beyond her capacity perhaps- or am I being too kind to her?  Never will you read or hear Kelly ask of the McCanns a pertinent question regarding the many inconsistencies in the stories given by them and their buddies to police.  NO SIREE, Kelly will NEVER go there.  She gets paid for the shit she writes, she's a 'jobs worth'!   Means nothing to her if she prints lies about this case, about Brenda Leyland, Dr Amaral.  As long as she doesn't tell any home truths about the McCanns, she keeps that nice little column earner!   And she stays in McCann good books!  Forever there to fire the bullets.  They set them up, and like the dumb ass she is, she loads and fires!  The dumb ass that keeps on giving.  But so dumb is she, she just cannot see how she has been used.   Could be a nice female in her own flowery, flouncy, airy fairy world - Some say she is, wouldn't harm a fly, but is shit thick.   Hell ain't that the way of it, the dopes always the most dangerous, easiest to manipulate - and Kelly seems to have fallen foul of McCann manipulation!

Now I make no claims in that respect, never claimed to be the brightest pebble on the beach, but like to think I smell a rat before the situation reaches the stage of infestation.

Infestation seems to be a big problem for some forums where McCann case is discussed...

So, as I was saying, never ceases to amaze me when stories such as the one I happened to read this morning, about a TV company which is looking for someone to come forward and speak to them about the McCann case, is given any consideration whatsoever.  Not for a nano second, nope, not for a nano second folks, would anyone of sound mind, consider this.  

For what it's worth, if anything, my thoughts...

- Why in hell would a forum member ask others what best to do, about a communication received from said TV company, when said individual must have discussed this with the person (their buddie) whom they claim set up the email/contact which he/she claimed to have received from the TV company?  No reason for an SOS to forum members if this is the case.  S/he must have known what s/he was getting into.  Known the name of the company and what sorts of stuff they produce.  Otherwise s/he would not have given the ok to the buddie to pass on his/her details to them.  So why the SOS, the cry for HELP?

And why would this individual say s/he would ask the TV 'person' if his email address could be displayed on the forum for members to send their questions (their email address would then be known to said TV person) and, and this is the biggie, this forum member states also, that s/he cannot guarantee that the words of anyone who contacts the TV company, will not be TWISTED.

Why in hell then is s/he even contemplating any reply whatsoever to the company?

That makes no sense.   If s/he cannot guarantee the words of others will not be twisted, how would s/he be certain that his/hers would not be twisted also?

IF on other hand being contacted by the TV company came as a bolt out of the blue this communication (though that is not the claim made) then his/her buddie ain't no buddie.  Buddies like that, you drop 'em! (from your phone/address book...just to be clear on that!)

Thus far in this TV story I count three rats...
One swallow don't make a summer.
Three rats? -

In my book that's an infestation - Time to call in the Pied Piper!

Dare I say to the receiver of the communication... Ever heard of Room 101?

Dare I say also - looks like you're trying to pull a fast one!

There isn't a TV company out there that is prepared to tell the story of missing Madeleine McCann, like it is...not a reporter either...Well not yet...
26th September 2015

Website Builder