My Maddy Rose - to YOU Madeleine - & FIRST EVER ARTICLE 4thMay 00:01!

First Ever Madeleine Rose
From a Rose Tree Called Maddy
Planted by myself in our home garden in June 2007 in England
With Great Hope
May This Rose Tree Bring Children In The Whole World Happiness.

An Orchestration from pre-written SCRIPT?

Here is the FIRST EVER ARTICLE... just a bit EARLY! At ONE MINUTE past Midnight on the 4th May 07!

truthformadeleine.com...

The current URL of the story in question is: www.telegraph.co.uk...

Three year-old feared abducted in Portugal

By staff and agencies

12:01AM BST 04 May 2007

"A three-year-old British girl has gone missing while on a family holiday in Portugal, the Foreign Office said today.

Portuguese police are investigating the disappearance from a holiday complex in Praia da Luz in the western Algarve.

A Foreign Office spokesman said that he understood the girl's parents had gone to have dinner once their children were asleep last night, but returned to check on them only to find the girl had gone missing.

"They reported it straight away," he said, adding that consular assistance was being offered. "


_________

The dateline of this story is 12:01AM BST 04 May 2007. In Portugal the time would have been the same 12:01 AM, because that country is in the same timezone as the UK.

There is some dispute as to the exact time that Madeleine's disappearance was discovered and reported by Kate McCann. For the sake of discussion, let's say that the disappearance was reported at 10:00 PM on May 3, 07. A British child goes missing in Portugal and exactly 121 minutes later a press story appears on the website of the Telegraph newspaper announcing that there is a child missing in Portugal and this announcement is made by the British Foreign Office.
121 minutes!!!

Let's try to construct a timeline of events working backward from the precise moment at 12:01 AM when someone pressed the key on their computer to upload the story to the web.

12:01 AM 04 May 07: Story is uploaded.

11:58 PM 03 May 07: Story is typed up and proofread.

11:45 PM 03 May 07: Data entry staff receives email from editor containing story after having been phoned and alerted to situation.

11:35 PM 03 May 07: Night editor of Telegraph receives phone call from publisher or editor in chief informing him of the details of the story which he takes down over the phone. There is minimal discussion. He relays story and instructions to publish immediately to his staff.

11:15 PM 03 May 07: Foreign Office press officer phones Telegraph publisher and relates the substance of the story and requests immediate publication of it. He agrees to accept attribution of the story to the Foreign Office. There is some minimal discussion. The publisher agrees to print the story in accordance with long established protocols between the press and the FO.

11:13 PM 03 May 07: Mr. X, a functionary of the British Foreign Office at a level somewhere in support of the Minister of State for Europe, Geoffrey Hoon (in 2007), gives instructions to the FO press officer, above.

11:00 PM 03 May 07: Mr. X is instructed by a superior in the Foreign Office to relay the substance of the story of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann to the Telegraph through established channels.

This is irregular and it is difficult to understand the purpose of it. Mr. X would have remarked this undoubtedly. Usually such stories would be "broken" independantly by the press itself or through official statements from Interpol or other police agencies.

The "Foreign Office" attribution for the story is the sticking point.

Keep in mind that only a little over an hour has passed since the disappearance of the child! What if the child were to be found? Twenty minutes later the British Foreign Office might have to issue another press release with the happy news.

If the British ambassador in Portugal were the first member of the British Civil Service to hear of this story and wished to expedite press coverage of it, he would normally use backchannels of his own to alert the press and ask for an "unnamed sources" attribution of the story.

Keep in mind that even a quickly solved child disappearance is a winner in press circles. The ambassador would not have to twist arms to get the story published, or would he?

Does the press normally publish stories about children who have been missing only for a little over an hour?

10:XX - 11:00PM: Information and a request for assistance in the matter of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann moved from Portugal to a ministerial level in the UK where discussions took place and a decision was made to issue an alert to the press, with Foreign Office attribution, for a child who had been reported missing less than an hour before.

10:00 - 10:XX Madeleine was discovered to be missing and after searching for less than an hour, political help in the situation was sought in the UK and received. This is truly impressive. Rule Britannia! Congratulations to the FO.

Over here in the boondocks of Canada our "External Affairs Department" doesn't have the balls to issue a press release when a child goes missing for an hour. Shame shame you "two bit" ex-colony of woodchoppers and fur traders. Take a leaf from the FO's book. Not a sparrow falls from a foreign limb without being observed and aided by the FO. And on such short notice too. Less than an hour and they are on the case. Truly incredible.

Strange though, that one doesn't hear the constant praise of the FO being sung by British travellers around the globe. I'm inclined, myself to believe that they are much like any other government department. Wily, but slow and deliberate. www.dailymail.co.uk...

But according to a secret U.S. diplomatic cable, Britain refused to speak to Mr Dyer or his captors in the weeks before his execution - and were aware that the Briton was facing a death sentence unless the terrorist's demands were met.

The cable, published in The Daily Telegraph, reads: 'In January ould Mataly offered to put British officials in telephone contact with the British hostage - an offer the British apparently never accepted out of fear that speaking to the hostage could put them into a position of having to negotiate with terrorists.'

If the British Foreign Office and its masters are wily, but slow and deliberate, isn't it more likely that the timetable for their deliberations and actions, actually started a day earlier than advertised, and that they only seem to be alert, quick and decisive, not to say impetuous, gallant and slightly hysterical?

But that is precisely the claim being made by the blog Unterdenteppichgekehrt, that Madeleine died on the 2nd. of May, 07, a day before the public became aware that something was wrong in Praia da Luz. "http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread628700/pg1

Is the BOOK the SCRIPT of a "STORY"?

Chapter Seven

As we can see hereunder the same script was used both for tv-speech scenes and the book "madeleine" -Yes I repeat there is NO capital M to its title, made of Madeleine Beth McCann's Name. I find this chapter, "AFTERMATH", particularly disturbing. At some point Kate Healy or McCann describes when herself and her husband were stepping out of the church on Portuguese Mothers Day 6th May 2007. It is included as a normal part of the book, but is in fact a recited piece of speech by Kate at the time - in front of the tv cameras. Isn't it quite a little curious how Kate would have kept her mini-speeches notes? Why would she have kept this? Surely she would remember thanking the People without having to keep the precise note, so why would she keep such token, which surely only reminds her of horrid memories?

 If she kept the note (as opposite as having it it beforehand), with which intention: to write a BOOK? (if the case, wow! she knew so long in advance that Maddy would NOT be found for YEARS! -of which we have many other instances in the PLANNING of events!)
-Or, could she be reading from a PRE-WRITTEN SCENARIO SCRIPT? She has actually read and -perhaps- kept many other notes, that she also includes in the book. I wonder who wrote these scripts.

- and if I am putting my finger onto an element of truth, I might as well broaden my speculation and wonder when exactly the whole scenario of this story could be written: before 2007?

I find all this as it is happening too surreal. Since I have started reading the book I have found it mind-boggling. For example in the SECOND chapter called MADELEINE (the first is called GERRY...), for the finally positive pregnancy with Madeleine, Kate explains that TWO embryos were implanted into her womb via IVF treatment. But there is no further mention at all as to what happened to the other embryo since that the only Embryo who is talked about, became Madeleine.

-Yet on much photographic material Madeleine seems to have a twin. Clarence Mitchell also mentioned the "other twins", slipping up.

Chapter Two Extracts:

"This time the cycle didn’t go quite as smoothly. Once again I responded well to the drugs – maybe a little too well, because my ovaries became over-stimulated. I’d swear they were the size of melons. At any rate, I was very uncomfortable. It was agreed with the team that we would go for a day-three embryo transfer. On day two, however, we received an urgent call from the embryologist, who told us the embryos weren’t looking as good as before. He recommended that I come into the hospital for the transfer immediately. Suddenly, we both felt very despondent. If a ‘perfect’ cycle hadn’t worked, what were the chances of this one being successful? Two embryos were placed inside my uterus but this time we did not allow ourselves to get even slightly excited and the cotton-wool coddling went out of the window. I arrived home from the hospital and headed straight into the garden to do some planting. If this was going to work, it would, I told myself. But I wasn’t holding my breath."

[...]

"The next morning at the hospital the positive pregnancy test was confirmed. Everyone was ecstatic but no one, of course, more so than Gerry and me. Inevitably there were more tears, but this time they were happy tears. I felt like a different woman: taller, buoyant, instantly radiant. I could not stop smiling. I thanked God every hour. We didn’t tell anyone, family or friends, for a couple of weeks – we were too concerned about tempting fate and somehow, at that early stage, it just didn’t feel real. For days on end I would repeat to myself, ‘I have a positive pregnancy test, I have a positive pregnancy test,’ rather than acknowledging, ‘I’m pregnant.’ It wasn’t until I had an ultrasound scan at six weeks and we saw a little beating heart that I allowed myself to believe it.
And that was the first time we saw our little Madeleine. Even then she was beautiful."

At the same time as I was reading the book I was re-visualising Kate, Gerry, their friends and all, remembering how I had, at the time, the feeling that they were actors. They were reading their appeals from notes. Their emotions seemed misplaced, somehow. Changes of expressions and attitudes were puzzling me, like Gerry laughing on his patio a few days after the "abduction", or Kate giggling rolling her shoulders, filmed by a male friend, explaining "the tiny window of opportunity" that the 'raptor' had used to steal her daughter.

Kate often mentions the need for violent outbursts, taking her anger out on objects or verbally onto people. Her choice of words and topics are highly explicit and I hide the book away from my Children. She often says, things had to come out. Has she written this book to exorcise herself onto her readers? Comes to mind: the Disturbed that wants to disturb. Or is she playing the part that is written on the script again when she presents the book on mediatic shows?

This whole case reminds me of a macabre machination, a play that is well orchestrated with different episodes a bit like some tv series nowadays, all at once while much script is getting written, followed by months without any show because a new script is being prepared for the episodes to come, and the actors  and the directors are having a posh holiday. A good analogy would be The Matrix. (Or is it The Omen?) It's all about media and production. -And of course, MONEY. Like a scenario project that needed, to be born and valid, a good selection of staff... but that appears distrastrous.

Gerry was talking outside his holiday flat just while his kid was getting snatched apparently, to his friend Jeremy Wilkins who is a TV director. An article was published at one minute past midnight on that night... A Media Monitoring Unit magna came to help... And Alex...

This is the short extract that has suddenly made me realise that the book is just like a script- it is not the only extract that gets me to think this:

"Everybody prayed for Madeleine. [...]At the end of the Mass,

every mother and child came to the front of the church to hug and kiss us. ‘She will be back,’ they told us. Three words were whispered to us over and over again

and have remained with us to this day: esperança, força, coragem. [...] Alex was keen for us to leave the church by the side door, where we could be escorted out quickly, past the media and the gathering crowd, [...]but on that

occasion, I think we were probably right to walk out of the main door along with everybody else. At that moment I suddenly felt I wanted to speak to everyone, to

thank them for what they had done for us, and as we approached the few steps leading down into the street, that’s exactly what I did. It’s all a bit hazy now – it was

then, for that matter. I know I was crying. The fact that I said anything at all, especially given my antipathy to speaking in public, is a measure of how important it

felt to me to do so, and every word came from the heart.

Gerry and I would just like to express our sincere gratitude and thanks to everybody but particularly the local community here who have offered so much support. We couldn’t have asked for more. I just want to say thank you.
Please continue to pray for Madeleine. She’s lovely. "

Haven't we clearly heard this somewhere before? Watch the first listed video.
-And, when did Kate get the time to learn to say something like Please give us our daughter back and these other Portuguese words she mentions in this book extract?




They now say that the coloboma is a mere fleck in Maddy's right iris, it was different then:

 o0

Transcript: The Mystery of Madeleine McCann-BBC-Panorama in 2007

From the BBC site itself: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
QUOTE:

Transcript: The Mystery of Madeleine McCann

NB: THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS TYPED FROM A TRANSCRIPTION UNIT RECORDING AND NOT COPIED FROM AN ORIGINAL SCRIPT: BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF MIS-HEARING AND THE DIFFICULTY, IN SOME CASES OF IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS, THE BBC CANNOT VOUCH FOR ITS ACCURACY.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PANORAMA

The Mystery of Madeleine McCann