Maddy Age-Progression Lab - Upgraded

Spoof by our scorching, inimitable KA OSSIS!
-"upgraded" by your Friend Mega ;0) -

Note that "Maddy" would now be nearly NINE years old, but, technically, OK, "she"would be eight. It's approaching her "birthday". Of course "it"'s approaching her "anniversary" too.
So NO stone un-turned, we all get it, yeah I will NOT leave ONE stone unturned..., I might as well get to Egypt and ask everyone there why so many stones were turned, now all tombs and sarcophages have been raided and appear completely EMPTY. Have they seen Maddy too? Oh well, perhaps the same isn't happening regarding the MADDY's FUND after all, is it EMPTY? Or does it only appear to be so?

Curiously if my own fund gets emptied then I fill it up by work, hard one, but in the case of Mrs Kate HEALY I see that she still holds, proudly, the key for the Rothley "Manor", NOT having to job-search nor having to re-train as a Doctor. Busy times, busy ways. Updating a "bewk" must be "hell", oh dear.

Anyway any other time - and this one is NO exception- that approaches "Maddy's Anniversary" (3rd May) or "Birthday" next, (12th May), sees a myriad of Sightings and an equally abundant flurry of press-articles.

Curiously, very curiously in fact, when it's about an opponent WINNING A TRAL IN COURT, like Mr G. AMARAL recently regarding his Book, A Verdade Di Mentira, (Truth about the LIES), the TRUTH of the FACTS is COMPLETELY BLANKED, BLACKED OUT, by ALL "media".

Anyway here is an "image" that is supposed to represent "our Maddy" right NOW, at nearly NINE years old:

Mmh, Olivia Newton John at 55? (after visible cosmetic surgery)  OMG what has happened on the ears lobe?!- - - Why do they always have to look American??

IS THAT WHAT AN EIGHT YEAR OLD IS SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING LIKE? Both grandmothers must be so proud: Oh look! She looks like ME!

Source: Express Co Uk

Reminder:

It says in French: LOOK INTO MY EYES, etc. So once again, with no more concern than hot chinese lanterns massively threw into the air or else dangerous colony of balloons, we all saw a pair of parents who left their kids, THREE under THREE years old, ALONE, UNATTENDED in a holiday flat, claiming very strangely that , due to a "forced entry" with so-called "smashed windows" and "damaged shutter" (LIES!!!!), their nearly 4 years old "Madeleine" was "abducted", on top of it were also URGING EVERYBODY TO LOOK INTO EVERYBODY ELSE'S CHILD'S EYES!

 

WHO DO THEY THINK THEY ARE?!!

Excuse me Mr Cameron, but these uncaring, neglecting people you grant private interviews to in your PM office, using tax payers money, use and abuse your paid time, and ours, big style. Why don't you BOOT them in the BUTT and launch the Social Services on them?! This should calm them down for a little while. You would also do your DUTY.

Mr Cameron, you should also set the POLICE on them, for public lie and misuse of media, and abuse of public trust in their vast appeals for donations. Yes, use and abuse of public trust, because this has happened in England too, and in the rest of Great Britain, not just in Portugal. The people here have been lied to and even hidden facts!

Mr Cameron, you should also look at what happens to other cases where lies and fraud are suspected - if not totally evident like in the case of their "forced entry" which was not even a theory, but mere, gross fabrication. The McCanns still knock at your door and ask for special treatment, so why don't you take the usual measures and set a good old fashion TRIAL to question these two globe trotters, and allow the true LIGHT be shed on the biggest enigma of the year 2007?
I'm sure if you reacted the way you really should, Mr Cameron, they would stop FOR GOOD coming knocking at your door and waste your precious time. I think you should mind  the Homeless, the energy bills, the lack of electric re-fuel point for Electric Cars, the lack of flexibility for people who start a business, Education and, of course, the NHS. Or are the Mcanns STILL more important that all this in your eyes?! If so I'd really need to know WHY!

Thank you for reading.

NO Photo Of Kate's Pregnancies?

Bit weird, isn't it. The Celebs from Leicestershire/ Praia, Algarve would, for sure, cashed on a £ Million if only they had provided some photographs of Ms Healy "wearing" a wee bump, with a caption: "My Pregnancy With Madeleine".
Another wee bumper could have been: "Here! You all want to see Maddy's health records? HERE they ARE!"

But NO. Nothing, and still nothing new in that department for the PJ. No Health Records / Files of any sort. TA-BOO! And the CC (Credit Cards) records / account statements copies are equally TABOO.
Woosh!
Though, imagine the financial BOOST it would have given to the FUND!

Here is something I have spotted from my readings (and it's brought me BACK to an OLD Topic of MINE on the "3as"' former forum... I'm glad that Thoughts Do Stick!!!):

maternity ward pic?

" juliet on Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:22 pm

I've seen a photo which looks as if it's taken in a maternity-type ward - with a bed and so on. The funny thing is that Gerry looks like the mother - IIRC he's on the bed with the newborn and Kate is sitting by looking fresh and dressed and in no way as if she gave birth in the last day or so. Do not have a clue where the pic might be found.

It makes you think though - esp as Kate never seems to talk as if she really carried and gave birth to Madeleine. It's all "the pregnancy was so easy", "when Madeleine appeared" etc...the last bit is how adoptive parents talk. "When dhe came to us," sort of thing.

Was Madeleine carried by a surrogate mother? Was she adopted?"

Last edited by admin on Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:28 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : To add pic)
--never mind, Jill Harvern always finds a good "reason" for EDITING, or CENSORING (as long as her precious Ads aren't!) re my "Questions To The McCanns" (Click!)

Pro photographer owns Maddy photos! Why?

Here is one result from an internet search. If you google :Madeleine McCann photographer , you will get lots more results. This early article below was raising the question: Is Paul Grover the same man as the one from the professional photos agency? I can assure you now that we were a lot of people to search on this, and the answer is: Yes!
So why is that? Why were all these 'dolled up' pics taken by this professional photographer? To which goal? And whoever good parent would want to have such a photo like this below taken?
Doesn't this seriously araise curiosity, if not severe suspicion, to the mind, when we know that all these pics were sold at top-wack price to the press - was this a whole pre-organised strategy 'just in case' this kid would go missing by any chance? Or is it pure coincidence?.... In any case , I think that NSY (The Met) should need to ask this child's parents about the need to pay a photographer, who usually SPECIALISES IN CELEBRITIES and other VIP's, (so imagine the BILL it must have reached... for people who needed to serve themselves out of their public fund to pay 2 months of mortgage, it's rather STRANGE, no?) - and possibly quizz this man too, Mr Paul Grover, and his agency. Collect statements and compare them - and I've just been told that the 'heavy blue eye-shadows' is also from the same photographer. Information to check upon, and I would welcome details about this, if true.
Many photographs of "Madeleine McCann" have triggered angry comments among the public, who has massively described these pics as 'heavenly material for paedophiles'. -See forums and other internet comments and reactions since 2007.- Photos have always been a key function of the campaign " Find Madeleine"..., even these that did not portrait the child as she was looking like at the time when she went missing. The early posters showed a much younger child, not to mention the interesting statement of Silvia Batista: http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t19640-to-clarify-where-the-twins-were-sleeping-on-3rd-may-silvia-batista-s-statement-mccannfiles

"[...] As she said earlier she was alerted about the disappearance of Madeleine between 22.30 and 23:00. She was at home and was informed of the event via a telephone call.
She drove immediately to the Ocean Club where she arrived a few minutes before elements of the GNR popped in.
After she arrived she went immediately to the apartment A5 where she found several people inside the apartment and outside of it. She entered in the flat but soon left without having spoken with anyone, because she was informed that elements of the GNR were in the principal reception. She went there to meet them.
When she came close to the elements of the GNR she found that behind her was
Gerry, Madeleine's father, accompanied by another man whose identity she doesn't remember. Then Gerry kneeled down, hit the floor with both hands, positioning himself as if he were a praying Arab, and screamed twice of anger, what he said being impossible to understand. Then Gerry stand up and accompanied her (the witness) and the other man in the car of the GNR to the apartment A5.
She entered the apartment and asked for the passports of all elements of the family, and also photographs of the missing girl. She went with Gerry to the GNR car to hand over the requested documents. She mentions she did this, as well
as other tasks, at the request of the GNR Commandant, because she could translate their questions and the missing girl's family's answers.
She remembers Gerry gave the Commandant of several photographs of the missing girl. They were postcard-like pictures, taking into account their size and shape and seemed all the same to her.
She understood also that since the very beginning either Gerry or the others insisted on stating that Madeleine had been snatched, all using the word "abducted" instead of missing, and all showing much interest in informing the press of the situation. [...] "

"27.12.07

[source: http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2007/12/strange-picture-of-madeleine-from-paul.html ty Paulo]

A strange picture of Madeleine, from Paul Grover (*)

Is this the same Paul Grover from REX FEATURES, "Britain's leading independent photographic press agency and picture library, supplying a daily service of news, celebrity, features, and stock photos to all national newspapers, magazines, TV, web and other media in the UK and in more than 30 countries worldwide"? Or is it just a coincidence? The picture was posted at one of the several sites organized and promoted by a McCann special support group, a secret organization which has members in more than 25 countries. The site was set up on May 9th, just six days after Madeleine McCann disappeared.

Gerry Superimposed Into Photo Of Kate Holding Baby who?

What a surprise... not... as we've seen far too many photos of Madeleine doctored and manipulated pastings and paintshop tooled to sink a battle ship in the past four year's, that is it really surprising to find yet another so called family photo were Gerry has been superimposed into it to make it look like Gerry's the typical family man!

Take a screenshot copy of the above, and put it into your picture viewing program and you'll see all the highlighted edges of Gerry where a blending and colouring tool has been used to put Gerry in the photo with Kate holding a child, and then ask yourself, why do the Mccann's need to fake photos and publish them if Madeleine was really their child!

Gerry look's the same age he was when he went to the court in Lisbon, and funnily enough, he's wearing the same tie that he wore to sue Ameral for his book in 2009, but Kate looks quite a few year's younger and has her own teeth, not the vineer's she's had since we first saw her in May 2007, which would put this photo of Kate holding the baby possibly before the year 2000.

And did anyone notice that not only Gerry is superimposed into the photo with Kate and baby, but also the picture behind Gerry's head, which was on the original photo of Gerry before it was cut and pasted in. There's a lot of blending used around the picture frame to blend it into the background to disguise the addition.

Also, Gerry's body is behind the baby's body, but his head is in front of the baby's head, and he's not leaning his head that far forward for this to be a correct composition between baby and Gerry.

The only other addition's I can pick up in the photo is Kate's had some extra colour added to her lips and so has the baby, and the baby's got a grey/blue right eye and a brown left eye, and the coloboma/fleck is situated at 06:30 on the clock face, instead of the regular 06:35-40 positions shown in other photos and videos.

Aren't The Twins Older In Donegal April 2007 Than They Were In May 2007!

Who Are The McCann's Kidding...
Not Us, That's for Sure!

Take a closer look at Sean and Amelie in Praia May 2007, they're still in the toddler stages of child development, still wearing nappies, still having to hold an adult's hand for stabillity, which lasted until at least February 2008. Yet looking at the photo of Sean and Amelie with Madeleine in the photo that was suposedly taken in Donegal April 2007, neither Sean or Amelie are in nappies, they're well past the toddler stage of child development, and are confident enough to stand and walk without a helping hand, which prove's that the photo of Madeleine in Donegal with Sean and Amelie was taken over a year AFTER April 2007!

The Case In Photos

http://s574.photobucket.com/albums/ss184/ThreeMaddies/

Interesting quotes!

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2011/05/14/madeleine-by-kate-mccann-hostile-hostile-references-to-the-madeleine-foundation-and-its-secretary-mr-tony-bennett/

 Comparison  -Note: on the first photo it was CHRISTMAS 2006 time: WITH:

Logically on the footage captures in the stairs, Madeleine should look younger than on the first photo, as is the case for her sibling twins. But it's the opposite! She looks older whereas they appear to be younger!
Is this going to be explained in the book??

Interesting Comparisons In Photographs

Let us look at various elements in these comparisons and spot interesting "anomalies":



The first photo as showed in the British online press was identified by myself as from /around the Christmas time 2006: approximately 4 months before Madeleine (featuring on the photo, next to her little brother Sean) 's missing event. I have used landmarks in videos and photos to determine this date and am certain of it - and can prove it. The second photo shows her little Brother Sean: approximately 9 months after the first photo. 9 months is a significant amount of time in any toddler growth. Which clothes would fit the same toddler 9 months after? And isn't it strange that he was wearing exactly the same outfit, in September 2007, as 4 months before his Sister's 'missing' day? - Isn't it also curious that the exactly same-looking little boy is showed in the public press photo-gallery 4 or 5 months before and 4 months after? -please feel free to comment, I do not forbid Freedom Of Speech - unlike SOME.

Madeleine Case-Photos- all dates