Who Needs Enemies When You Have clarence mitchell On Your Side?

On 11 April 2008, Clarence Mitchell made this bold claim: “Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken”. He later said, referring to himself and the McCanns: ‘We have nothing to hide’. When addressing a largely student audience during what were called ‘The Coventry Conversations’, Mitchell said: “We are always willing to co-operate with the Portuguese police”“Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken
Qualifiers are words which, when removed do not change the meaning of the sentence. here we have the qualifier UTTERLY which weakens the statement, it is repeated twice further weakening the statement and making their honesty and openness with the police highly sensitive.

Mitchell said: “We are always willing to co-operate with the Portuguese police”. 
Qualifiers are words which, when removed do not change the meaning of the sentence. 
Here he uses the qualifier ALWAYS as well as using the future conditional WILLING.
He doesn't tell us the mccanns are cooperating with the police, only that they are willing.
This willingness is weakened by the qualifier ALWAYS.

Anyone can be always willing to do something, it doesn't mean they will, it depends on the circumstances.
I may be willing to swim the channel, it doesn't mean i will or can.
It would depend on how fit i am , the weather, the cost, support etc.
Why does he include himself in relation to cooperating with the police?
Has he himself been questioned in regard to what he knows regarding Maddie?
As their spokesman, he would be privy to a lot of stuff the mccanns don't want the public and especially the police to know. 
What they would be willing to do to cooperate with the police would be based on them not incriminating themselves, guilty knowledge or consequences to themselves and possibly others such as their children.

Given that we know they have been anything but open and honest with the police, kate not answering the 48 questions, them not doing the reconstruction despite being legally obliged to as arguidos, by getting their tapas chums to set so many demands and requirements as to make it impossible to do and thus they don't have to do it.
They lied about the checks, the neglect( the children were all in one apartment being watched by which ever adult who was allegedly sick, they withheld their medical and financial records, hired lawyers first thing and did everything they could to obfuscate, derail and generally stop the investigation in its tracks, even to suing the lead detective (now retired) when he told the world Maddie was dead and they were involved , this is despite both kate and gerry telling the world the same thing.

When they are arrested and charges are laid against them and the tapas 7 , will we see clarrie in the dock as well charged with obstruction and perverting the course of justice?

Every time they, clarrie or their tapas chums or family members open their mouths, more of the truth is leaked out., for which i and many other statement analysts and forensic linguists are eternally grateful.

Something To Make You Ponder

I am currently reading the latest Terry Pratchett book A Slip Of The Keyboard and i noticed the very nice picture of Sir Terry adorning the front.cover.

In particular, it was his eyebrows.

I noticed they were decidedly bushy and, like a tree, growing up towards the light.

Like many things in life do, i got to pondering.

Why does the hair on the head of a man migrate south  in the winter years of a man's life?

I can see it could be caused by gravity, gently working its magic on the hair and like many things, everything heads south over time.

This would explain the hair growing out from the ears and nose and perhaps to a beard then slowly on to the chest before wending its merry way down to the tootsies.

Gravity  doing its thing and hair taking the easiest way out

Why though do eyebrows do the opposite?

Why, instead of following the usual migratory pattern of the greater bald headed homosapien, do they grow upwards and outwards, often in spectacular style, anyone remember Dennis Healey and his eyebrows?

Would we have older men walking around with eyebrows down round their chin and doing a darn good impression of an Old English Sheepdog?

This then led me along the path of what would happen if they weren't tidied up and , were in fact, left to grow au naturel?

Would there come a point where, instead of the normal comb over as often seen on men of a certain age from side to side or, in the more experienced wearer, combed not only side to side but also back to front with clever interweaving of the remain strands a la Donald Trump resulting in a helmet of hair that is virtually indestructible and also having a multitude of partings, a hairy version of Spaghetti Junction. we would see comb overs from the front to the back, making full use of the eyebrows.

Will the cleverer ones have comb overs not only from their eyebrows , but also their ear and nose hairs.

Why not make full use of any hair that is lazing around in the head region?

Heck some could even transplant some of their eyebrows to fill in the bald spots

Could we see mohican punk style eyebrows in a wide variety of colors?

The plus side though is, unlike the traditional combo over which blows around wildly on a slightly breezy day, i would not have the urge to cut the offending  flap of wispy hair off and then tell the wearer to never do it again.

I figure i must drink more coffee in the morning before i start doing any thinking