Madeleine McCann: A good way to bury bad news?

Anyone who was around at the time of “New Labour” knew they were a vile government epitomised by the way they tried to use 911 as a “good day to bury bad news”.  Thatcher might be thought to epitomise cold hearted government, but in reality compassion, like honesty and integrity were concepts unknown to New Labour. They made lying an art form and we are still suffering in the UK.
So I’ve often wondered exactly what Blair had to gain personally by given the McCanns a highly skilled Labour spin doctor to help them manipulate the media and create (unwarranted) support as was the “New labour” way of doing government.
So let’s see whether we can put the pieces together. First let’s hear the words from “Craig” who I assume was a British diplomat familiar with the case:
… Which leads me on to the question of why they received such exceptional treatment from British authorities, directed straight from No. 10, to the extent that Blair and Brown eventually gave them a PR representative? I used at one stage to be Resident Clerk in the FCO, a now abolished post effectively of night duty officer. I can tell you from horrible personal experience that the FCO deals with gut-wrenching cases of lost or dead children abroad frequently. I spent one of the most terrible three hours of my life, through to a cold dawn, on the phone with a hysterical bereaved mother desperate to explore any avenue that might give a possibility that the boy who had just drowned in Brazil was misidentified as her son. On average, I am afraid such tragedies get substantially less than 1% of the public resources that were devoted to the McCanns.
I am going to come straight out with this. British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case. I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.
This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO. It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody. Plus, against jingoistic presumption, a great many Brits who have contact with foreign police are actually criminals.
The British Ambassador in Portugal, John Buck, had been my direct boss in the FCO. he was Deputy Head of Southern European Department when I was Head of Cyprus Section. He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.
I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly. But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.
For the avoidance of doubt, I do not believe there was a high level paedophile ring involved. I make no such argument. Nor do I claim to know what happened to Madeleine McCann. But I do believe that the McCanns were less than exemplary parents. I believe that New Labour’s No.10 saw, in typical Blair fashion, a highly photogenic tragedy which there might be popularity in appearing to work on.
And I believe there is a genuine danger that the high profile support from the top of the British government might have put some psychological pressure on the Portuguese investigators and prosecuting officers in their determinations. (The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns)

From this we learn:

• That Labour misappropriated vast amounts of UK money to support the search for one specific girl something that they did for no one else.
• Those close to the case cannot fathom any rhyme or reason to this massive labour interest.
• That even those dealing with the McCanns did not believe them – so it’s that much more suspicious that so much time, effort & money went into “helping” them.
• It was run like a typical No 10 PR effort: “I believe that New Labour’s No.10 saw, in typical Blair fashion, a highly photogenic tragedy which there might be popularity in appearing to work on.” That suggests the prime motive was “spin” in some form.

What then was the reason for Blair’s interest in this particular girl … or perhaps more relevant at this particular time as she disappeared on 3 May 2007
In March 2006, several men nominated for life peerages by then Prime Minister Tony Blair were rejected by the House of Lords Appointments Commission. It was later revealed they had loaned large amounts of money to the governing Labour Party, at the suggestion of Labour fundraiser Lord Levy. Suspicion was aroused by some that the peerages were a quid pro quo for the loans. This resulted in three complaints to the Metropolitan Police by Scottish National Party MP Angus MacNeil, Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader), and a third individual who continues to remain unidentified, as a breach of the law against selling honours.
In March 2007 after both the police and the attorney general failed to obtain an injunction, The Guardian newspaper revealed that the police had shifted their focus from whether there was an effort to sell peerages to whether there has been a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. That clearly implicated Blair and there was clearly a strong possibility he would be prosecuted.
On the 20th April 2007, The Metropolitan Police hand over their cash-for-honours file to the Crown Prosecution Service. It is 216 pages long and has 6,300 supporting documents. The CPS says it will now review it to see whether any individuals should be charged with any offences.
Number 10 and particularly those involved in handing out the honours (i.e. Blair) must have been petrified. We don’t know how much pressure was applied to the police to stop the investigation …. but Blair’s team were not known for being timid in asserting themselves.
13 days later on the 3rd May 2007 with the prospect of a massive scandal engulfing the Labour party a little girl is reported missing in Portugal. In the same way that 911 was a good day to bury bad news, it is clear that Madeline McCann was a good way to blanket the newspapers with stories about this little girl and so smother the coverage of the Labour cash for honours scandal.
28th June 2007 – The day after Tony Blair left office as Prime Minister it was reported that the police had interviewed him a third time some time in early June, and again not under caution.
23 October 2007 – PASC questioned Assistant Commissioner Yates regarding the expenditure of the Metropolitan Police Commission during the Cash for Honours Investigation and the lack of subsequent charges.
I’m very sure that several people involved with the Madeleine McCann death avoided Jail by the skin of their teeth. The McCanns were used by Labour to hide their guilt over Cash for honours and in return Labour spin doctors returned the favour and buried the truth about Madeline in a torrent of press coverage.
All this time people seem to have missed the real story. Madeleine’s murder was tragic, that her muderer(s) got away with it is inexcusable, but the real truth is arguably far more horrific, because …

Just as Labour tried to use 911 to “bury bad news”, so it is my belief that they also cynically used the tragic death of Madeleine McCann to again “bury bad news” with the cash for honours scandal – and they got away with it.