"could see the apartment from where they were dining"......I think this was debunked by Richard Hall. I'm not sure though. I've seen maps of that resort and where the restaurant was and the view from the restaurant to the McCann's rental is blocked by a tennis court or something like that.

As some of you may remember, Maddy had coloboma just as Soros does. Her mother had IVF and as I read on here that probably Soros is the father. Her reported father Gerry had some CP scrubbed from his computer by the police as I also read on here from a report. This was quite a while ago. Coloboma is a very rare anomaly and so as we all have read in some posts that the elite want and need blood to stay younger. This is a problem for a blood match. So I believe they have solved the problem by using IVF and compensating the mother. Now I do not have sources for all of this but I do have a good memory. I believe we will never know whether the Podesta bros. were ever in Praia del Luz because they are both lobbyists and their flight records are not kept, which I believe is also true for ambassadors. As far as Freud's involvement, I think he read about it and being a pedophile, what a sexual charge he would get to have the parents come to dinner. Getting so close to the story is almost living it. I imagine there is a huge thrill involved in being that near to the parents. Remember how demented these individuals can be. The efits are way to close to be discounted. Soros needed people he could trust completely to carry this out. I believe they stole Maddy for Soros because that would the perfect crime as a cover up. He needed her then, so they were to bring her and if the blood part is true then maybe she fought them. For all we know she may still be alive. Remember she has the DNA of Soros which would be a constant supply of blood. How much blood they need at one time I do not know, so if they need too much, then maybe they had to kill her. That's just my take. The whole mess is beyond chilling and disgusting, no matter how it happened.

Richard D. Hall is very perverse. He only likes conspiracies he has discovered himself. If it's something other people have discovered, he's often dismissive in the extreme. He's also highly selective in the subjects he chooses to investigate and, if it's not something he's decided to investigate, it's a hoax and just a way of pulling the wool over people's eyes. He also likes telling people that nothing they do will make a difference, for example, he told people not to vote in the Brexit referendum, which he said was pointless, because even if Britain left the EU it would leave the corrupt British system of government still in place.

where did he get the money to make the movie? his own? somebody else's? Noreen gosch gets screwed a lot going on TV and such, they always go against her rules, and bring her lying husband into the interview. it was great she was able to reach out and get people who care to fund the movie, Who Took Johnny?. So I wonder where the money came from for this guys 'McCann movie'.

To put it simply Richard D Hall doesn't want his own Madeleine McCann narrative diluted by PG. Ok the guy has spent a lot of time & money not to mention his own resources putting together his version of the McCann case. Which he is quite convinced is one of death & disposal of the body rather than abduction. The evidence of the cadaver dogs does tend to skew it in this direction. RDH is always in demand of 'evidence' to substantiate any statement and the irrevocable evidence of the dogs seems to stand up. However the controversial assumptions he goes on to make concerning various members and ex-members of the British secret service and the media not to mention powerful people with government connections has yet to be proven. A seldom mentioned fact concerning Madeleine is that she was an IVF conceived child, along with both of her parents being doctors. If we accept the fact that this is a case of a death and body disposal, could it also include organ-harvesting as there are also questions as to who supplied the sperm for the conception, and was she 'made to order'? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-487063/I-AM-Madeleines-dad-Gerry-McCann-rejects-claims-sperm-donor-used-IVF.html

https://archive.is/d6O8v

I am going to have to go back and check, but i am sure that these efits were made by a US private investigator while allegedly interviewing a couple from N Ireland. He basically ripped the McCanns off.As for Freud, odious as the man was, I don't find his involvement surprising at all. What I do find surprising is the way he is alleged to speak to Kate McCann, the mother, and how she reacted. As far as little Maddie is concerned, the dogs do not lie, and they say there was blood on the floor at the window and a body in the cupboard, as well as blood in their hire car. Doesn't look like she was abducted by anyone, but rather died in the apartment.

In so far as the Podesta bros not being there at the time, I believe that Richard is 100% correct. What is more incriminating is that the Efits were made some years after the event by an investigator that was on the run from the DoJ in the US, and seems to have used the situation to fire a warning shot across the bow of those who were after him. IOW - you come after me, and I know who and what you are and I will take you down with me. Hence the likeness to the Podestas. It is actually more incriminating when you think about it. Why the fuck would the POdesta bros who are rich be prowling round streets in Portugal kidnapping children themselves when we know that there is a huge operation there who they can simply purchase one from?? Wake the fuck up please.

Thank you for this.

What a fuckup this Richard D. Hall character is. Where is the proof that she is JA's GOD-DAUGHTER?

I totally agree SnideLemon. The most convincing evidence was the cadaver dog signalling in the apartment and also in the McCann's rental car. First of all dogs don't lie. Secondly they signaled in the apartment AND car which pretty much eliminates the coincidence of some other corpse being in either place.

The McCann's didn't leave their 3 kids alone while they went to dinner. That's absurd. The parents were both Doctors, it's hard to believe they'd be that careless. They staged the discovery.

It sounds like he's trying to convince himself. He mentions only a tiny fraction of the clues/leads and on top of that he's pretty bad at trying to debunk them.

Many sources are intent on dismissing anything and everything without evidence. It's a major clue. We know people won't just admit the evil exists. It's how they react that gives them away.

What an idiot! But then some pro-pedophilia nutjob would take on the job of botching an investigation of Madeleine McCann. It makes sense. Especially since he can't even read: http://archive.is/hiU2N It says: #chickenlovers. Look, I don't mean to burst anyone's bubble, but things aren't this simple. You can't think: "Oh, great! This guy is doing a documentary on Madeleine McCann so he must be trying to seek the truth and on our side" anymore than you can trust that the baby pictured is James The Majestic Ape Alefantis' Goddaughter. It doesn't work that way. This guy sounds like a complete disinformationist and a real c nt and douchebag. F ck him and his movie.

This Richard D. Hall?

From the html on his site:

<meta name="description" content="Believe none of what you hear and only half of waht ( sic ) you see. Exposing the lies in our mainstream media." />

These are topics listed under RESEARCH

• Madeleine McCann
• 911 Radar & Video
• 7/7 Bombings
• Energy Research
• Animal Mutilation
• Sussex Mutilation Case
• Crop Circles
• Berwyn UFO Case
• Lincolnshire Triangle

These are listed under RECOMMENDED

• UFO Truth Magazine
• Terror on The Tube
• 7/7 Ripple Effect
• Check The Evidence
• Madeleine McCann
• Disclosure Project
• Neil Sanders
• Check the Evidence

For a guy who is so "open minded" and interested in difficult to prove subjects, I find it interesting how easily it is for him to dismiss Pizzagate.

It's obviously a well thought out opinion.

He leaves himself room to be incorrect, which is good because he does get some things wrong. This tends to cause me to want to disregard his research.

Off the top of my head, he gets things like Tony Podesta not owning any controversial Djurdevic art. He does, this one and I'm certainly no puritan but taken in context it's just another red-flag data-point.

He also gets the "#chickenlovers" thing wrong. As most here are aware, It is a euphemism for pedophilia .

I'm sure I could go on and find more errors in Hall's research, but...I won't.

Exactly

I started watching the documentary but I have not finished it yet... 4 hours is pretty long!

He may be right about the Podestas not involved in McCann dissaperance, I don't know. But what upset me is the way he dismisses everything in PG without much arguments.

I'll make a guess at what the "Chicken Lover" thing means: Alefantis bought the kid a stuffed chicken on that day ( it's in one of the pics with the baby and also captioned chicken lover ) so he could put the double entendre out there for the amusement of his pedo friends without raising suspicions with the parents or at least the mom.

Here's what he says about the e-fits:

The e-fits of alleged Madeleine suspect cannot possibly be the “Podesta brothers”. Each of the two e-fits were constructed by two different people and are two persons recollections of ONE alleged suspect. So the two e-fits are not two people. They are in fact the same person. This means the e-fits are unreliable because they look so different.

That is ridiculous because why would he believe that there is only one abductor when the e-fits look so different? Why wouldn't he suspect that the witnesses were describing two different abductors who were in on it together?

Please everyone, look up "Waardenburg syndrome eyes", and go back and check the post titled "Congenital Anomaly Register and Information Service (CARIS) JAMES" from about 12 hours ago. This is absolutely an important potential lead!

Richard Hall said that because there's a mountain of evidence that the McCann's covered up Madeleine's accidental death. He has a 4 HOUR documentary on it and it's very clear there was some sort of cover-up.

So naturally any accusations from PizzaGate that the Podesta's were involved or that girl in the photo is an older Madeleine McCann are dubious.

What is NOT dubious are the 2 efits that match John and Tony Podesta. A lot of people think they were used as models for the eFit because some people in high places wanted to fuck with the Podesta's. As in the eFits hit two birds with one stone. They helped cover up Madeleine's accidental death AND helped cast suspicion on the Podesta's as pedophiles. Why? I have no idea but that's one of the theories.

Everytime these guys are put on the spot they come out with a terribly half assed and selective "debunking" while failing to address the other 1000 things that need explaining. They have nothing, this is the only tactic they can use.