In my last article, I mentioned I was attempting to coin a signature slogan (to complement my existing, "if you know their name, they're in the game"), to encapsulate my belief that, if an event receives excessive, high-profile media attention, it's often a sign that the event is fake.

In mentioning my new catchphrase quest, I wasn't quite anticipating the flurry of creative flair that followed, as many of my subscribers, followers on Twitter, and even IRL friends, contacted me with their suggested slogans - and there were some absolute crackers in there (with especial thanks to Trevor, Jonathan, Angie, and Toe and Mrs Knee, amongst many others) - but the crowning catchphrase that I thought most suitably summarised the staged subterfuge, came from Simon C:

"If it's in the news, it's a ruse."

Slightly edited by me to, "if it's headline news, it's a ruse."

Which couldn't be more appropriate for the headline news I saw in the Daily Mail today, that...

'Disturbing hard drive 'found buried in Madeleine McCann suspect's abandoned lair contains clues that the three-year-old is dead'

The article went on to state that "the findings were revealed in a Sun investigation to be broadcast on Channel 4”.

This, therefore, is probably one of the most transparent and explicit reveals that this event is fake: staged, scripted, acted, not real.

To be clear, if a real person is under real suspicion of murder, the case is not investigated by a tabloid newspaper and then broadcast on a terrestrial TV station, before the individual has even been charged with - let alone convicted of - the crime.

Real crimes are investigated by the police, and real suspects are tried by the judiciary, not by the media.

Indeed, there are clear and robust laws in place preventing such "trials by media" from occurring, as obviously, such exposure would run a high risk of prejudicing the trial and preventing the defendant from receiving a fair hearing.

This is particularly so following the Leveson Inquiry, in which the practices of the police in releasing details of investigations to the press were examined. Lord Justice Leveson’s report into the culture, practices and ethics of the press (published 29 November 2012), recommended that “save in exceptional and clearly identified circumstances (for example, where there may be an immediate risk to the public), the names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be released to the press or public.” 

Obviously, there is no risk to the public from "Christian B", the supposed suspect in Madeleine's murder, since the man is in jail (for an unrelated crime).

So why are such intricate details of his alleged "guilt" - to reiterate, before he has even been charged with Madeleine's disappearance, let alone convicted of it - being released to the public in such a sensationalist, high profile way?

A Sun investigation, a Daily Mail splash, and a Channel 4 documentary, no less.

I refer you back to my new catchphrase...

The whole Madeleine McCann child abduction saga is just a long-running televised crime drama, replete with endless plot twists and red herrings, to keep people hooked on the action.

It's really quite a feat to keep the same missing child in the headlines for 18 years, when thousands of children have gone missing since whose names we never hear at all, and obviously, there's a reason for it.

Currently - we are told - a young woman by the name of Julia Wendell (who also goes by Julia Wandelt and Julia Faustyna) is languishing in a Leicestershire prison cell, on charges of stalking the McCanns, whose missing daughter she claims to be.

Julia, not incidentally, is listed on a casting website in America, described as an actress from Arizona who specialises in feature film, TV, and video.

Moreover, Bridget O'Donnell, one of the individuals on set in Praia de Luz where Madeleine "went missing", is a former BBC crime producer who specialised in staging reconstructions for the investigatory show, Crimewatch.

So what we are almost certainly seeing here - and have been for the last 18 years - is a staged child abduction drama, scripted and produced by crime reconstruction experts, and acted out by theatrical professionals.

There was, plausibly, never a real 'Madeleine'. She's a fictional character that has been created for the purposes of propagandising the public, and baiting us all into turning detective, pointing fingers this way and that, just as any good crime drama does.

And just as any good crime writer knows, the narrative must be flipped right at the end, to deliver the "shock ending" that "nobody saw coming", in order to satisfy the expected narrative arc of suspense building and tension and release.

That means the culprit is not "Christian B".

It also means it's not the parents.

Those are the obvious red herrings we're supposed to argue about. We're supposed to say, "the establishment is trying to make us think it's Christian B, whereas we all know the parents did it!"

Then - plot twist! - right at the very end, it turns out it's not the parents after all, as Madeleine's been alive all along, as will be revealed in October when Julia Wendell (as one of my astute subscribers pointed out, 'Wendell' is an anagram of 'end well'), confronts the McCanns in court and they are required to "give evidence" - including the DNA evidence Julia's been pleading for, and that they inexplicably refuse to give.

What an amazing story, eh? What a gripping, edge-of-your seat thriller, full of plenty of twists and turns to keep us all hooked for nearly two decades as we build up to the sensational grand finale...

For those who aren't up to speed on the latest new storyline, Julia Wendell (who, to reiterate, is an American actress with a profile on a well-known casting website who specialises in TV and film) was supposedly arrested when she came to the UK in February, on charges of stalking the McCanns, and held in custody until a hearing in April.

She pled not guilty, meaning the case will go to trial in October.

Until that time, she is allegedly still in custody - a ridiculously heavy-handed penalty for what she is accused of (primarily sending online messages), and thereby adding to the sensationalism and drama.

Due to Wendell pleading not guilty, the McCanns will be required to attend the trial and give evidence.

Wendell will, of course, request they provide DNA evidence, which they have consistently refused to do (evidence that would definitively show one way or the other if they are related, as Wendell's most recent DNA results seem to suggest they are).

Can you imagine the media circus surrounding this trial?

Headline news in every paper, trending on every social media platform, breathlessly dominating every office water cooler conversation...

Is it her? Could it be?!

Tune in next time, folks...

The whole thing is following the very well established, tried and tested TV formula, for keeping people hooked on a drama.

Integral to keeping people addicted to the action is high-profile press attention - and, indeed, the press does oblige with giving high-octane news headlines to explicitly fake TV dramas, such as the 'Free Deirdre Barlow' campaign.

When fictional Coronation Street character, Deirdre Barlow, was sentenced on the show to 18 months in prison for fraud, several newspapers - including The Sun, which is now "investigating" the Madeleine McCann disappearance - launched campaigns to have the character "freed", promising readers "justice".

In response, Granada TV, producers of Coronation Street, indicated that it planned to keep the gripping drama running, promising more twists and turns in the coming weeks.

So, given we know for a certain fact that the media conspires to present soap storylines and fictional characters as if they are real - and that the producers of these televised dramas rely on this media hype to keep people hooked - is it really such a leap of logic to conclude that the media is doing with Madeleine McCann just what it did with Deirdre Barlow?

I don't think it is, and what's more, I think the press does this all the time: presents confected soap storylines and fictional characters as if they are real.

Virginia Giuffre

Lily Phillips

Luigi Mangione

The Southport Stabbings

Any number of "terror attacks"

The media knows - as confirmed by Granada TV - that what people want, and what holds their attention most. is "gripping drama" and "twists and turns", so that is what it provides, whether through explicit soap operas like Coronation Street, or tacit ones like Madeleine McCann.

Whether the soap opera is overt or covert, the purposes are always the same: to powerfully shape public perception and opinion through the phenomenal power of storytelling, stories delivered by characters whose names and faces we become deeply attached to.

People cared about "Deirdre Barlow" because they knew her name and face so well.

Ditto Madeleine McCann.

A soap opera is such a powerful vehicle of social change for the ruling classes because they can beam it into every household in the country, whilst wielding complete control over the narrative and what the characters say and do.

Ditto headline news.

Headline news gets reliably delivered to every household in the country, whether it's through TV, newspapers, or social media, and completely dominates the national conversation. That gives these events incredible power, which the ruling classes would not allow them to have unless they were in control of the outcome, i.e., unless the event was being stage-managed in some way, and quite often, outright faked.

Whilst real news events do get reported, they never get the fanfare, sensationalism, and consistent high-profile media attention that the fake ones do. That's because when an event is real, the social engineers can't shape and control it the way they can when it is fake.

To illustrate, no real woman in prison for fraud has attracted a throng of tabloid newspapers vigorously campaigning for her release: a fake one has, though.

No real child who has been missing for nearly two decades has continued to make headlines consistently for 18 years and have everyone still talking about her: a fake one has, though.

If it's headline news, it's a ruse.

So what is the ruse, we may ask? Why are the media deceiving us with Madeleine McCann, and over such a long period of time?

I believe the purposes of this long-game psyop are two-fold. I detailed my theory at length here, but to sum, the dual purposes of this operation are: one, to gain public approval for the microchipping of children; and two, to provide more "evidence" that we need restrictions on free speech, especially online, as all these crazy internet cranks victimised the innocent, grieving parents, the McCanns, when they played no part in Madeleine's disappearance as she's been alive all along. That's what I think the ultimate conclusion of this very long-running soap storyline will be.

To further ratify the fabricated, theatrical nature of this saga, please look again at the "headline news" telling us about the new "evidence" linking Christian B to Madeleine's death.

Look at the gun.

Look to the bottom left.

(With thanks to the eagle eyes of Leo B for spotting this!)

This is scripted, staged Masonic theatre, and this is the signature flourish to let us know. Whenever a high-profile event is fabricated, the scriptwriters behind it often lace the tell-tale '33' through the coverage, in the same way any artist might sign their work.

So, they've told us this is fake (they always have to tell us, as per their "karmic code").

Therefore, whether we continue to fall for the deception - to invest in the ruse - remains, as ever, entirely up to us...

Thanks for reading! This site is entirely reader-powered, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, making it truly independent. Your support is therefore crucial to ensuring this site's continued existence. If you'd like to make a contribution to help this site keep going, please consider...

1. Subscribing monthly via Patreon or Substack (where paid subscribers can comment on posts)

2. Making a one-off contribution via BuyMeACoffee

3. Contributing in either way via bank transfer to Nat West account number 30835984, sort code 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA (please use your email address as a reference if you'd like me to acknowledge receipt).

Your support is what allows this site to continue to exist and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.