It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Hollie Greig UK media blackout will not hold back the truth

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:40 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:43 PM
Ha ha well feel free as I am not he and explained why I picked the name page one ,apparently you chose to ignore that fact. He doesnt have a copyright on that name .

I will send your comments to Robert Green and let him decide on libel about his mental illness,I am not a lawyer

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:48 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:49 PM
reply to post by destination now

I did read it and I find your tone very threatening .
edit on 10-7-2011 by MARKDALY because: pressed reply too soon

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:54 PM

Originally posted by MARKDALY
reply to post by destination now

I did read it and I find your tone very threatening .
edit on 10-7-2011 by MARKDALY because: pressed reply too soon

I beg your pardon...threatening in what way? Well I can see the true colours of Anne and Robert's supporters shining through here and if there was any doubt in my mind about whether there was any truth in this story, it has now been removed. I have simply posted an opinion on an internet forum and am now being attacked!

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 01:56 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:02 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:08 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:14 PM
reply to post by destination now
It's probably just as well to leave him alone. His or her emotive use of the girl as a means of debate isn't healthy. For that matter, it's not even clear if this thread content is particularly healthy. I could labour the point and explain why I feel that way, but would inevitably fall into the trap of similarly using her as a means of scoring points.

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:23 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:55 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:55 PM
I have followed this case since the beginning and one thing that becomes apparent very quickly is that there is a determined effort, by government entities, to keep this out of the public domain.

That sort of coordinated conspiracy of effort tells a story in itself. It begs many questions.

You only have to look at the coordinated disinformation campaign by one fruit loop and his bevy of created characters. It is laughably bad but he still continues - must be quite a bit of cash involved.

It's a cover up - not a very good one. They sent in the clown/s

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:56 PM
a lot of information regarding the so called policewoman abuse at the petrol station, transcript of parts of mark daly interview and other relevant info.

ask yourself if an award winning bbc journalist who had already uncovered child abuse would state such things as he discovered after investigation in public if he could not back up his claims in court.

im quoting part of it here -

MD: Tony part of this paedophile ring, the ringleader is the sheriff, he’s also involved with his sister and his sister’s wife. Now Robert being an investigator, Truth Ranger as he’s been called, will of course have made sure that these relationships exist. The truth Tony, is that this sheriff has no sister, therefore has no brother-in-law. Okay. So you know, these are the main people of the paedophile ring and two of them don’t exist. Okay. Now, shall I move on?

TL: Yeah, I’d just like to ...Anne, would you like to say anything to that?

AG: That’s not true at all

MD: Well these things as you know are checkable through the register of births, deaths and marriage, marriages and er ask Robert to maybe have a look at that. Now next...

AG: I think you must have the wrong sheriff there

TL: sorry, say that again there Anne

AG: I think you must have got the wrong sheriff

MD: No I don’t have the wrong sheriff Anne I’m afraid, I don’t. Now, if I can just continue

TL: Yeah, continue

MD: It’s been said, well firstly, the allegations were made at first in 2000 and many of the allegations were said to have... some of the abuse was said to have taken place in the sheriff’s house in Aberdeen. This sheriff...

AG: That’s not true

MD: Well Anne, I’ve seen some of the allegations and it is true

AG: Ah that’s not true, that’s not what we told you.

MD: He didn’t live in Aberdeen until 2000. He didn’t live in Aberdeen until 2000

RG: We never said that

MD: He only lived there in 2000. These are the kind of things...

AG: We never said his house. At all. We never mentioned his house at all

MD: It has been said Anne. It has been said. These are the kind of things that investigators investigate to see whether or not they can proceed with a story. Now can I move on?

AG: That was never said at all that it was at his house.

MD: Okay, well I think you have, have said that. That allegation has been made Anne.

AG: Hollies’ here, do you want to speak to Hollie and ask her?

MD: No I don’t Anne. I think that would be inappropriate.

AG: No, no I didn’t think you would.

RG: We never said it was the sheriff’s house. (unintelligible) so I’m afraid this another lot of nonsense you’re coming out with.

MD: Robert

RG: I could...

MD: Robert, you know those other seven children you’ve named?

RG: Sorry?

MD: you know the seven other children that you’ve named?

RG: Yes.

MD: Two of them weren’t born at the time of these allegations.

RG: I think that is...I think you’re absolutely wrong there Mark.

MD: Have you spoken to any of these people?

RG: I’m not making any comments on them.

MD: Have you spoken to any of the people that you’ve said have had any part of this paedophile ring? Have you spoken to any of the other victims that you’ve named? Because I can tell you they’re all (unintelligible) about it

AG: (raising her voice) These children that you are speaking about are all adults now

MD: Sorry?

AG: These children that you’re speaking about are adults

MD: No there not. Two of them are ten years old and were not born at the time of the allegations.

AG: (shouts) they’re all adults

MD: Shall I move on?

TL: Yep yep, continue if you want yeah

again - here is the blanket refusal when challenged on their evidence to answer any question put to them on what was actually discovered
edit on 10/7/2011 by Sauron because: internal quote tags to external quote tags

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 02:57 PM

STOP discussing other members NOW!
It is off topic and if it keeps up, posting bans will be handed out! FINAL warning!

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:00 PM
reply to post by Nazirite

no, there hasn't. the media wont report a story as untrue and unprovable as this one.

there was no d-notice

there were no threats to the bbc

there is nothing to support the truth of the story and so much that it is false and distorted

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:22 PM
two more contradictions from anne on the official site...

Coincidentally, Shrewsbury Police, acting on a tip off from the SSS that Anne and Hollie had gone missing, this gave them an excuse in law to force entry into Anne’s home on June 3rd. Since they did not find any corpse they felt it was necessary to seize Anne’s computer and change the door locks, leaving her unable to enter her home over the weekend, no inventory of items removed has been so far offered. This is also law.

note - the 3rd of june 2010 was a thursday and the line leaving her unable to enter her home over the weekend

On the 3rd June I received a message from a local solicitor that my daughter and I had been reported missing by a Mr Greg Lance-Watkins, who I have never met, and that police officers accompanied by two social services officials had forcibly entered my home without my permission.

When I went to my home that evening I found that the front and all the interior doors had been broken open and an untidy search had been made leaving documents, correspondence, photographs and personal possessions scattered around.

so in the first instance she couldnt access the home till after the weekend and in the second instance she went home the same day (thursday) and entered the premises.

also note that while she states she had never met glw - she did know who he was as she had authorised him to be her official site and gave him documents to put there as evidence, which are still there today. why does she give this false impression?

then - why would a random local solicitor know her phone number, know her house was broken into by the police and call her about it?
edit on 10-7-2011 by justyc because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:24 PM
Hmmm! Smell that, don't you just love the smell of desperation in the morning.

Ad Hominem

Arguing against fact and documentary evidence

Distortion of facts

Introduction of trivia


Strawman.building......................all leads to a vigorous fallacious argument and disinformation campaign.

When you start to take flak you know you are over the target.

Yawn! You are too transparent in your efforts.
edit on 10/7/2011 by Nazirite because: missed word

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:29 PM
reply to post by justyc
I'm a first-aider and we're trained to expect broken ribs whilst applying CPR. My most recent instructor (February) explained how it's inevitable that ribs are broken, but the alternative is death.

The transcript you linked is fairly telling. Here's part of the video, if anyone opens it in You Tube they can hear all of the interview and make their own minds up on the discussion...

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:46 PM
please start this video at the 3.50 mark.

she is talking about when hollie told her in the hostel after 2 weeks that her dad would kill her and her dogs.

so - hollie tells her that her father abused her and she did NOTHING!

she did not report it immediately to the police as any normal mother would. she waited until the next day till after hollie went out with her carer for the day and came back and then asked the carer if hollie had told her. now why would she first not go to the police, and second, if hollie had kept this secret all these years, why did she tell nobody about it during that time?

compare it to this paragraph from the official site -

In the summer of 2000, Hollie told her mother, Anne, that she had been repeatedly sexually abused by her father, Denis Charles Mackie and brother Greg. The abuse had begun when Hollie was just six years` old. Hollie said that Greg had also been abused by his father. Anne Greig reported this immediately to the local police station in Aberdeen.

any mother would have gone straight to the police.

also - ponder on this.

the official version states that anne thought her brother was acting odd in the weeks before his death (remember he was suspended from his job for suspected embezzlement and was most likely worried about that). she states that hollie told her after his death (another thing that can't be verified) that anne's brother had walked in on the father raping her.

any decent grown man would most likely have done the following two things in this order -

beaten the crap out of the father

gone to the police with anne

edit on 10-7-2011 by justyc because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 10 2011 @ 03:54 PM
reply to post by Kandinsky

in regards to the autopsy on the brother, they claim he was repeatedly bashed on the head with an axe handle and thrown into a burning car. his skull was cracked open from this vicious attack, his ribs were broken and he had a fractured sternum.

stuart usher, the only person know to have seen the autopsy confirmed the above was not true. he suffered a contusion (bruise) to the head and the rib injuries were consistent with prolonged cpr from a non trained person.

the official cause of death was smoke inhalation and he was way over the legal alcohol limit which was in his blood and stomach.

they accuse the man who found and tried to save him of actually murdering him. now if this man wanted to murder him then why would he bother pulling him out of the car and trying to save him? shouldn't he have just left him to burn to death in the car and claim he got there too late?

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in