Sorry to be a spoil-sport in such euphoric times of watching the McCann’s sandcastle shiver while it watches the rising tide slowly but surely come in, but I must get this off my chest.
What are we demanding from the McCanns? One word: honesty.
Honesty about what happened that night. With that, consequences will follow, that one must endure as result of one’s actions. It all boils down to having the TRUTH be known.
It’s only logical that in order to demand one must first provide. Set the example.
That said I was quite surprised to read the name of an already exposed conman in a post about how Court proceedings were being successful in putting in pressure on the McCanns so as to rip away, once and for all, their evil masks.
How can one criticize Branson, Kennedy or Rawlings (basing on what I've read on who to expect to attend on Jan27th) in attending the forthcoming social event to refinance the Fraudulent Fund (can’t you people understand that the ONLY reason for these events is to provide a “plausible” excuse to inject money into the fund, regardless of who attends them?). They are only being friends to somebody they know is wrong, and has done wrong. Because, as all know, a really true friend is there when you need him the most.
So, all those being friendly with this gentleman, please refrain from ever again criticizing ANY of the McCann friends. If you do, you’re being hypocrite. Sorry, I know this isn't what you like or want to read, but this is what I have to say to be coherent with my conscience.
Liars are usually shameless people. Arrogant, egocentric and egomaniacal are devoid of shame. Put all these traits together and you’ll find the same amount of shame as you’ll find life in little Maddie’s cadaver.
I’m still waiting from him the same that I’m basically demanding from the McCanns: a truthful recognition of error, and full assumption of responsibility for deeds done. Instead, I got a lame excuse that it was personal business.
I do believe that this gentleman “forced” his way in, as only a manipulator is able. Saying an outright “no” to this kind of person takes a courage that most people don’t have.
Let me speak directly to you, whoever was responsible to invite the gentleman*. I’m led to believe that his presence was a direct result of you being a True Friend of his. Not turning your back on him.
But were you? A friend, I mean. I tell my friends that my friendship towards them is not revealed by helping them to run away from responsibility, but in the fact of making them face it, with all its consequence. And is also shown by my full support to them all the painful way. If they are my friends, they understand that making ME going through the process of harboring their shortfalls, is an attitude that reveals very little friendship from them towards me.
Was this conman being your friend when he blatantly lied about his feats in a process in which you were deeply involved and to which you bravely gave your face? I don’t think so. And is a “friend” like that worth your friendship? That, Sir, only you can answer. However if you answer is affirmative, please don't ask any of the McCann friends & family to come foward and cooperate with justice.
I also believe that that was the reason for Joana’s absence at that dinner. I’m assuming this as this is what I would have done were I her. I probably wouldn’t have come up with such a polite excuse like she did, but she’s put a whole lot of her into bringing all of this to a successful end, and once again, has shown greatness by understanding that sometimes some things are much more important than oneself. I would I thrown a tantrum and would have sulked and behaved like a spoiled child. But then she’s lady, and her “lie” (which, I repeat, I’m assuming solely) is acceptable.
To finish, let me state clearly that I think that there were three major things that have been decisive in this arduous process of bringing the McCanns to justice: Gonçalo Amaral, the man and the book; Joana & Astro’s blog (sorry Kazlux, but you came in later) and the 3Arguidos Forum.
Not that many others weren’t and aren’t important. They were and are and I have one time or another named them, and if I haven’t I’ve been unjust, but these, for me, were the DECISIVE ones.
So, in honoring Gonçalo Amaral, we had a dinner where a conman was present and Joana wasn’t. At least now you know my opinion on the subject.
in Textusas' blog
Textusa, you must have read my mind, dear friend. thank you.
read and don't forget: Exposing a Swindler: The Truth About a Pathological Liar and Clean Slate : Exposing a Swindler Part II
*Note: (19Jan, 07:00) Through a comment on Joana's blog, made by herself, she suggests that there is a possibility of having used the name of Dr. Sargento's abusively in this post. Not wanting to be unjust, I have withdrawn from the post any mentioning of his name. It doesn't alter in anyway what I meant to say in it, and as said, originally, I have no problem in apologizing if that, I repeat, is the case.