Goodnight from Sydney

I did say yesterday that I would be getting the blog back to near it's normal format - and let's be fair, I did have a good shot at it - even if it was a bit belated!

I have altered the post-time on, "The Child In Time" to make it more accessible to those who want to read about the McCanns. The other day I came across a comment on "that" forum where a poster complained that he followed the link to the blog and all they saw was a "story on starving people". So I thought I would make things a bit simpler. There is also another article below that.

The reason the non-McCann posts were a bit late - is because of the McCanns - or rather their Pact of Silence mates who have suddenly found their voices again. Amazing what can happen when the going gets tough isn't it.

Jane Tanner, 36, spotted a man dragging off a child in a blanket. However (why are there so many 'howevers" when dealing with the McCanns and their fellow chums) later in the same article it is claimed , "But she believed at the time it was a dad carrying his own youngster."

Carrying or dragged? Come on down Jane, it's make your mind up time - the clock starts now.

Oh sorry - wouldn't want to put any pressure on you would we? It's not in the rules of the game to put any pressure on a group of professionals, that only applies to "sad loners". We wouldn't want the British media complaining you were "forced to defend yourself" either. That would never do - no matter how many times you change your damn statements to suit the latest damage control strategy.

Let's assume Jane that your latest statement, three months after the event, is correct. Why was the child being dragged? If the child was unwilling (I am using the word "child" because it may not have been Madeleine, and there are some of us who prefer to establish facts instead of making definite statements that can not be backed up).

The word "dragged" gives the perception the child was either (a) unwilling (b) unconscious or very heavily asleep. Incidentally, how do you drag someone in a blanket. "Dragged" would cause a significant majority of your target audience to visualise a child being dragged on their feet. Was the child wrapped in a blanket and the blanket dragged along the ground perhaps- therefore leaving fibres that may still be on the ground?

If she was not heavily asleep or unconscious and was being dragged unwillingly, how many 3 year old children "go quietly"?

Was the child fully covered by the blanket, with no legs, shoes or feet showing? What colour was the blanket? We know the group has excellent night vision when it suits them, so maybe you can describe the blanket.

Was it you who used the word "dragging"Jane or did the reporter for the Daily Star, take it upon himself to embellish the story? Either way you look at it, the damn thing needs clarifying because there is one hell of a lot of difference between "carrying" and "dragging".

I note your "heartache has increased by claims in Portuguese newspapers that she and her hospital consultant partner Russell O’Brien may have been implicated in Madeleine’s disappearance."

Oh for Pete's sake do me a favour. Every time valid points or questions are directed at the pack-rats and the McCanns, the media claim they are hurt, heartbroken or forced to defend themselves.

Let's face facts. We are talking about a group of parents who deliberately left their children alone, change their stories, come up with new ones and have been linked to one of the chief suspects - and you expect people not to question or scrutinise just in case it may hurt you poor little darlings.

The British press may work that way but I don't, so now you have spoken out - get used to it.

But when it comes to Murat, that's oh so different. You have the McCanns and their supporters, standing around with their arms folded like a gang of self-righteous Hilda Ogdens, saying, "Far be it from me to cast aspersions on someone who may well be innocent, but it's all suspicious innit like. You know - stands to reason like dunnit. Always something odd about him if you ask me".

What sort of pillocks do you take us for! Oh sorry, we all know the answer to that don't we.

*
Anyway, that is why I was late.

On a brighter note, I went for a walk this afternoon and have taken the unusual step of uploading SIX photos of the walk to the photoblog.

It's 1:40 now, I will try to respond to a few more comments, then head to bed!

Wherever you may be - be safe