Thursday, March 19, 2009

Spoof or no spoof, great idea!

The McCann Million Dollar Challenge

Austin, TX - Texan businessman, Tom Franks, has offered to donate a million dollars towards the Find Madeleine Fund, a company set up by the parents of missing British girl Madeleine McCann.

Austin, TX - Texan businessman, Tom Franks, has offered to donate a million dollars towards the Find Madeleine Fund, a company set up by the parents of missing British girl Madeleine McCann. Madeleine was three-years-old when she disappeared from her vacation apartment in Praia- da-Luz, Portugal in May 2007.

Tom Franks, who shares his time between Texas and L.A., said, “I will give the parents a million dollars if they can answer just one question. I will need to see evidence, either forensic evidence, witness evidence or strong circumstantial evidence that shows the man they want us to believe took their child probably did. If they publish compelling evidence that a man seen by a tourist before they arrived in Portugal, was "Madeleine‘s probable abductor," as they claim on their website, I will gladly give them a million dollars to help find that man.”


Franks explained why he had decided to make his offer to Mr.and Mrs, Mccann. "Justice has to be seen to take place for an innocent child. We must defend and protect children, even if it is difficult for others." He added that he "could not understand why they want us to believe a particular man took their child, when there has never been any evidence released that suggests that is the case and when the man has never been suspected by the police. It is important that when a child goes missing those responsible for that child tell the truth so that justice can prevail. I am happy to give the McCanns a million dollars to track down this man, if there really is credible evidence that he probably abducted Madeleine."

Franks' million dollar offer can be seen at: http://mccannmilliondollarchallenge.webs.com

The Pledge

My million dollar challenge to Gerry McCann

A reminder of some facts:

1/ A woman called Gail Cooper was on vacation in Portugal before you even arrived there. She says she saw a man collecting money for charity. Does that make him a child abductor? No. She says she saw a man on the beach when it was raining. Does that make him a child abductor? No. She says the man gave her the "creeps" because of the way he looked. Does that make him a child abductor? No. It means she might need to get out more, but no reason to believe he had anything to do with Madeleine.

2/ One of your vacation chums, Jane Tanner, states she did not see the face of the man she conveniently claims she saw, so I am not going to have you tell me she saw the same man Gail Cooper saw. She plainly would not know if it was the same man, if she had seen the face.

3/ On your website you display two pictures of the man your pal conveniently claims she saw and two pictures of the other man Mrs. Cooper says she saw.

You clearly want all of us to think the man Mrs. Cooper saw is the same as the one your vacation pal claims she saw and you want us to believe he is "Madeleine's probable abductor."

My Challenge

I challenge you to produce compelling evidence that shows Mrs. Cooper's man probably abducted Madeleine. I need either forensic evidence, very strong circumstantial evidence or witness evidence. I don't think you have evidence to prove that Mrs. Cooper's man probably abducted your daughter. You also have no evidence the man your vacation buddy conveniently claims she saw probably abducted Madeleine.

I think it is something you invented and you knowingly had a lie published on your website. Don't pretend you are unaware it is on your website. What parent with a lost child would not look at their own website designed to find their child? I think you are a liar. A controlling man like yourself would know fully well what is on your website.

If I am wrong and you can provide the forensic, strong circumstantial or witness evidence to substantiate your claim that the man probably abducted Madeleine, I will donate $1,000,000 to your fund. You can use that to pay your mortgage in full and take another vacation. Hopefully you will come back this time with as many children and you leave with.

You can either accept my challenge and publish the evidence on your website or decline my challenge and remove your lies from your website. The choice is yours, but the longer your lies remain on your website the more people will become aware you are a liar.

If you cannot accept my challenge, others will ask why not. Others will ask why you have lied. Why have you pretended to the public a man probably abducted Madeleine when you have no evidence to support that claim?

Others will know you are a liar. Others will wonder why you lied. I can only think of one reason why you would lie, because you want to create a smokescreen, a diversion from what really happened.

You are collecting money from the public on your website based on the claim that Mrs. Cooper's man probably abducted Madeleine. If you cannot substantiate that claim and it transpires you have lied, you had better pay every cent back to those you have taken money from, because that would make you both a thief and a liar.

Tom Franks 03/18//09

65 comments:

nancy said...

Hi Claudia and thanks Joana Morais!

Well, I don't think we are going to get a response for that challenge from the McCanns - do you?

I think this guy has a lot of guts but I also think he is not daft. I doubt he'd offer that sort of money if he thought they were telling the truth and would really take him up on it.

He knows, as we do, that they have no proof that anyone abducted Madeleine - if they have the proof then they should put their money where their mouths are, but none of them ever have.

How many times have we asked the pros to tell us just how an abductor got into that apartment and took Madeleine and where was the evidence. They've never come up with an answer yet. And the fact that the Tapas 9 refused to do a reenactment in Portugal says it all really.

Nx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Nancy!
I agree. I think this gentleman's money (if he is genuine) is as safe as it can be! :-)
Well, if there is any evidence of abduction, all the detectives and ex detectives hired by the Team don't seem to be aware of it. :-)
As for the pros, you have to understand that it's something recent. It will only be two years next May. I'm sure in a couple of years time they might come up with something. Or not...
That reenactment would be something worth watching, judging by their rogatories and interviews. :-)
Have a nice day, Nancy!
xxxx

helmylin2 said...

Hi Cláudia,

If this is genuine It is fantastic. Now my odd sense of humour comes into play. I can just see Gerry gnashing his teeth and saying to him self. " All that lovely lolly and I can't touch it" I think this case is making me slap happy.

Like you, I feel the man's money is safe as can be.

xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Helmy! :-)
Even if it isn't genuine, it's an excellent provocation! :-) Can you imagine how many matching earrings, necklaces and bracelets could be bought with one million bucks? :-)
I think it might be the safest money in this world!
xxxx


Like you, I feel the man's money is safe as can be.

mandarinn said...

Claudia, acabei de enviar-te um mail, mas usei o meu nome .É só para avisar que o mail "estranha viragem " e meu
bjs

Cláudia said...

Olá, Mandarinn!
Eu sei que eras tu, rapariga! :-)
Lida e respondida! :-)
Beijocas!!!

Anonymous said...

Claudia: "Can you imagine how many matching earrings, necklaces and bracelets could be bought with one million bucks? :-)"......ROTFLMAO!

Hi everyone, I agree, if genuine, TF's money is very safe! The McScams have never been able to show any evidence for an abduction, let alone by a specific suspect. Whenever we ask for evidence of abduction, the pros either brush it off, or try to claim that there is plenty of evidence, but they don't cite it!
There is, however, plenty of evidence that poor little Maddie died in the appartment, unless by sheer fluke, only the McCann's appartment had the cadaver scent and blood, only the McC's hire car had the scent of death etc., etc...

Have a good day all. Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan! :-)
As safe as it can be, in my opinion! :-)
What do you mean about no evidence of abduction, Dylan? Are you forgetting about Sketchman and Toothman? ;-)
The McCanns are very unlucky people. Both Edddie and Keela only alterted in places and objects related with them. I don't think they're dog people, do you? :-)
Have a great day, Dylan.
xxxx

Anonymous said...

I've just had a read on two 3as threads about what has been going on. I'm not at all sure about the accuracies of the posts (they are contradictory and confusing), but I have to say I feel sorry for Bren. She was the one that set up the 3as and she and Beowulf have given up many hours of their own time just to gain freedom of speech and justice for a little girl lost, and probably gone.

This is maybe the wrong place to say it, but I applaud Bren for her efforts, she has stuck her neck out just as GA has done and TB, and it is very sad to see people who want to disrupt that process for the good of freedom of thought.

As I understand it, Rhodes and NBrado have tried their utmost to bring down that wealth of information, as we know it. I can't post on 3as, but if Bren is reading, you've done a great job in ensuring that the proper information is out there, and that discussion and debate are still very much a part of our free World. Whatever you have done (and from what I see has been in defence), please do not let the few destroy your efforts which are no less than what Claudia has done here. Madeleine needs the likes of yourself and Claudia in the search for truth and justice.

Justice for Madeleine.

Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan.
I have to say I know very little about those details. But I'm also not that interested in knowing more. It has got nothing to do with why I'm here. I admire each and every person who has contributed to keeping debate alive (even those I don't agree with). The 3 As is the biggest platform for debate regarding the McCann case. I can't say I agree with everything that is written there. In terms of proportion, I might not even agree with most of it. But it is a great platform not only for debate but also for research. The amount of work done, mainly translation, is incredible. Without it, many people would not be aware of many things. And the incredible part is that even pros use that information since they haven't come up with any. All the info and debate would not be possible without Bren and Beowulf. Nothing else interests me. This little corner of cyberspace and whatever I have done cannot, in anyway, be compared with that. This is just a personal place for friends to speak their minds once in a while. And I like it the way it is. Small, cosy and quite balanced although I know some wouldn't agree. I wouldn't like it to be a place to discuss wild theories and gory details. It's just a place for opinions mostly among friends. :-)
Sleep well, Dylan.
xxxx

Anonymous said...

Hi Claudia,

Of course you are totally right in what you say. Your comforting little corner of blogspace is nothing to do with 3as and I am eternally grateful that it exists.

I guess I am just saddened, that little by little, all of the platforms that exist to seek justice for little Maddie, are being tainted by those who wish to bring the wall of justice down, brick by brick.

I say, bravo! to GA, TB and your good self, who manage a modicum of dignity in this battle for justice for a little girl who is in danger of being forgotten by the World and tangled in bureaucratic tape, and being lost in the ether of forum politics.

I suppose i just feel a bit sad that things have to come to bitchiness, as in RP's forum, and I'm very glad that places such as yours exist, so that people can still voice their support for Portugal's PJ and not forget that which some would have us forget, still exists as a very valid reason to write what we feel should not be forgotten.

Sleep well, Amiga (sp?) Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan! :-)
I am certainly no saint and I admit to having a short fuse. Occasionally; I allow myself (wuith the good help of others) to have a pop at the inhabitants of the HoF. if I was to be a well behaved blogger, I wouldn't do that. But I do and I don't regreat it as long as it isn't the focus of the blog. I like to feel free and do it when I feel like it as well as talk about other things, from time to time. I won't, however, join those who want to divert attention from what is really important, by turning this into a blog about other blogs. Debate platforms will only become that if we let it.
I have done nothing besides voicing my opinion and defending what I believe in, Dylan, which is what normal people do everyday. :-)
Dorme bem amiga. Yes, the spelling was perfect. :-)
xxxx

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Hi, Gina.
Why should I be able to answer your question? Is my name Tom Franks? I don't even know if it is genuine or not. However, wether it is or not, don't doubt the McCanns were made aware of it as soon as it was made public. After all it falls into the category of 'Media Monitoring' for which the Fund pays quite a bit.
As for the rest of your comment, it has to be asked to the McCanns. Sketchman comes from their camp. No one else unrelated to them seems to have seen the 'abductor'. The only other credible sighting was from Mr Smith and we all know who he seems to think the man he saw was.
Genuine or not, this man's money is as safe as it can be because there is no evidence of abduction.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, the only thing I know about is the website.
As for the rest, the McCanns must know more than we do. They were the ones who mentioned paedophile rings, no reason to think Madeleine was seriously hurt and Madeleine being alive and well.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Well, Gina, try to explain that to Mr and Mrs McCann...

nancy said...

Hi Claudia, Dylan et al

I think that the majority of bloggers on the 3A's have done and are still doing a fantastic job there.

I applaud people who put their money where their mouth is, and many on there certainly do.

I've thought of joining them a few times but don't think I would be able to keep up the momentum and I'd hate to be slapped down if I upset somebody, which you are bound to do from time to time! So I just enjoy reading all the views. It would be very boring if everyone thought and said the same thing. A different opinion adds interest in my opinion, as long as things don't go so far as gross insults.

Have a lovely Mum's Day, although I don't think it's the same date in Portugal.

By the way, hello to Mandarrin. Nice to see you posting on here.


Nx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Nancy!
I completely agree. And the amount of work, research and translation done is just absolutely amazing. Their contribution to information being available will never be forgotten.
If you feel like it, join. What if you upset some people? We all have to live with it. :-)
Happy Mother's day to you too. And you're right. It's not the same date here. Here it is celebrated on the first Sunday of May. And Father's day was celebrated on Thursday, 19th March. :-)
Enjoy the rest of the day!
xxxx

Anonymous said...

Hi all.

Nancy, there are many things I would like to reply to on 3as but i can't as I've forgotten my password, and I've tried to log in under a different avatar but I keep being blocked as the site knows my email. The only way I could comment now, is to log in with a dif. PW and a new email a/c, but it's just not worth it and so I'll have to be happy with reading instead! Frustrating indeed!

Gina, I think the new thread may very well be geniuine. Either way, we cannot know. However, I believe that the proposition is a sound proposition, and one which I think is fair and just. I am going through something similar myself against a large institution. It all comes down to putting your money where your mouth is and having conviction in what you perceive to be right and just. I know where I score on that front, but do the McCanns? Surely, $1,000,000 dollars is a very good reason for doing so? If that was the reward for my case, I'd be laughing all of the way to the bank!

Bluff or not, I believe that it's a fair challenge.

Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan.
Have you tried clicking the 'I forgot my passwors' when you log in? It may work and then you may reply as much as you can.
I find it an excellent preposition. :-)
Enjoy your evening!
xxxx

Anonymous said...

Claudia,

Yes I've tried that.... but you make me smile anyway :-))) Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Damn! (Not making you smile but that not working!). :-)
You can always try e-mailing. This is the only address I have got and have no idea if it is working but it is worth a try:

admin@the3arguidos.net

xxxx

Anonymous said...

Thanks Claudia,

I have emailed admin and will wait and see :-)

Dylan xxx

Anonymous said...

Dear Gina,

You are certainly correct on this account....

"As I am still open minded as to what happened and have weighed up all the pros and cons I still cannot see that the McCanns IF innocent can produce anymore information than the bundleman, toothman,...."

They cannot provide any more evidence and information, because there is no evidence, other than what T9 have advocated and what Mr Smith has witnessed, and what he has witnessed was Gerry McCann carrying a child away that was so 'out of it' that even he had to ask whether or not she was asleep, or even alive.

It doesn't look good, IMO, for Maddies's sake, and the evidence that we DO have, suggests that the poor girl perished in May 2007, unfortunately.

Take care, Gina and carry on keeping an open mind as it's crucial in this respect.

Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

You're welcome, Dylan! :-)
Have fun!
xxxx

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, they certainly are guilty of something else. Of making the police work more difficult, of going against police advice (who told them verbatim that in case of abduction making the eye detail public would be Madeleine's death sentence)and of hindering police investigation by not answering questions and by refusing to come back for a reconstruction after telling the world they would be back as soon as the Police requested. Does that make them guilty of Madeleine's 'disappearance' in the eyes of the law? No, it does not. Does that give people the right to doubt them and suspect them? In my opinion, without a shadow of a doubt. If that is the way innocent parents react to the disappearance of a daughter, then God help us because the world must be coming to an end. Never will I understand what makes innocent people obstruct police work and be uncooperative. And when they do, I have the right to ask why.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, I never suspected the McCanns of killing their daughter. Killing someone, in my opinion, means something deliberate.
I also said that they are obviously innocent at the eyes of the law. At least until one day, maybe, the truth comes to light. That, however, does not mean that people don't have the right to question them, because they do. And that is what a small group of people want to stop. Debate, discussion, questioning. I will never let anyone deny me the right to my opinions. When I was born, my country was a democracy for five years. People have died so I can speak my mind. And I will always exercise my right. Sometimes I think it is good to live in a democracy which is only 35 years old because people still remember what it feels like not to be able to have their say. Older democracies seem to take it for granted and sometimes forget what freedom of speech means, as we have been witnessing lately.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, I only take responsibility for what I write. And in the beginning, when this blog was created there were many posts which weren't published because I thought they went too far. I don't like wild accusations and I particularly dislike gory theories. I have never expanded much on theories, although, like most of us, I also have them. And I don't like going into detail. I am, however, allowed to not believe the McCanns. And I don't. I don't believe their version of events, I think they lied and I think they made the police job more difficult. And it is my right to believe that and to express it.
I don't think they live in hope. And I don't think they need information from the 'abductor'. And you know why I think that.

J J said...

Hello Claudia

I also don't believe the McCanns version of events.

1) They say they were not there when she was taken.

2) They know for sure she was abducted.

Those two statements contradict each other.

Either they were there and therefore know exactly what happened , but don't want us to know.

Or they were not there and know as much as we do. i.e NOTHING.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, because I wasn't there.
If the McCanns were not there then they don't know anything either.

So, which is it?

I wish they would tell us, for Madeleine's sake.

Cláudia said...

HI, JJ.
I agree with you. And I see one reason only for those 'inconsistencies'. And I don't expect them to tell us about it.

Anonymous said...

Hi guys! It's been a lovely sunny and mild day today. I hope you've all had a great Sunday :-)

JJ:

"Either they were there and therefore know exactly what happened , but don't want us to know.

Or they were not there and know as much as we do. i.e NOTHING."

You've made a very good point, I hadn't thought of it like that before. I have always found it very strange that they insist on an abduction though, and so do most others too. The evidence that they said they had for an abduction just didn't exist (ie., broken shutters), and the sightings appear to metamorphisise (sp?) each time Tanner opens her mouth about it!

Dylan (who is too lazy to log in!) xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan!
Great day here too.
I also agreed with JJ. Put that way, it seems quite simple, doesn't it?
Have a good evening, Dylan.
xxxx

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Well, Gina, I have two possible explanations.

1 - They created a monster but were then aboslutely unable to control it.

2 - In order for people to think exactly that. 'If they were involved, they would never be so high profile'. It's called reverse psychology and its mostly used by manipulative people.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, of course if they know something they didn't say before, they will not say it now. Unless some kind of trouble in paradise happens. However, other things can happen. DNA advances everyday and a body may be found one day.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

To be honest, Gina, I think some people really don't want the truth to be known. And that I find not only sad, but also dangerous.
I have a friend who also suffers from that problem. Try acupuncture. She has it under control and no pain with 5 or 6 sessions a year and managed to avoid surgery. But find a good professional.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Hope it works.
Good luck with the operation.

Zetta said...

Boo hoo! Gina disse que eu sou antipático!

What I don't understand about this challenge is the lack of publicity. If you google it, you get very few hits (not quite two pages) and the hits that there are are on blogs.

-----------------------------------

Just two questions about the J4 blog.

1) What am I supposed to be jealous of?Rosie and Tinks think I am jealous of something. What?

2) Quote from Rosie's ridiculous rant
This is the kind of behaviour that the yobs that post on the 3 A's and those that are left posting on Viv's encourage.
Such as JayJay?

Cláudia said...

Olá, Zetta!
A Gina disse isso? :-( ;-)
Maybe it is a spoof, Zetta. Or maybe someone is not interested in spreading the word! :-)

Two interesting questions you ask.

1 - Interestingly, fundamentalist pros always say that those who disagree are jealous of the McCanns. I can't see how anyone can be jealous of the McCanns. How can you be jealous of two people who lost a daughter as a direct result of their actions and have to live with that everyday (although sometimes I think in their case the burden doesn't seem to be that hard)? Most normal people would rather die then be responsible for such a tragedy.

2 - Good one! PMSL!

Anonymous said...

Hi Zetta,

I saw that too and it struck me as the usual childish poop!
What was so insulting, was that they implied that it must have been an anti-McCann that vandalised Jade's nurse's car. Well if they say it was, it must have been ;-)

Claudia, I concur.

Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan! :-)
Of course we would never dream of doubting their words! :-)
xxxx

hope4truth said...

Hello All

I think the Million Dollar site was a scam but it was a good question...

As for the McCann's not being guilty I know nothing but do know they have played a very dangerous game with their missing daughters saftey from the first time they left her alone until now.

If a child is missing you answer every question put to you and listen to the police and follow their advice to the letter.

You dont look like you have won the lottery with joyus smiles on what would have been your childs 4th birthday and if you are lucky enough to be given money to search for her spending it on a very dodgey fraud investigation agency and at that only spendins a mear 250k on actually searching is criminal in itself.

Who needs spin drs media monitors and expensive lawyers when a child is missing and if my Brother expected to get paid to run a fund set up to find my daughter he would find himself with a black eye and a cold shoulder. Many experts would have done it for free...

xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Hope!
Exactly. Couldn't have said it any better!
I'm mentally clapping you.
xxxx

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, let's get something clear before I answer the rest of your post. This will not be turned into the House of Filth. You are entitled to your opinion but others also have the right to think you were/are unpleasant.

Now, the rest. Do I think you are a spoof? Do you like to cause trouble where there is none, Gina? Have you read the title of the thread you're posting on? Have you read the article? Zetta and I were discussing it (Tom Franks and his challenge). I know it might be a peculiar concept because where you usually post people don't discuss threads (or anything else for that matter) and just goad and insult others. But here we try to discuss things. I'm nor interested where you post or don't post and why. And I think I have been pretty polite and even generous to you, after many of the things you said. Yes, we were exchanging points of view in a reasonable way until you did what you usually do.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, please stop talking about other places. I told you this will not be turned into another House of Filth. If you want to discuss something regarding the case, then go ahead. If not, then leave it for a more appropriate place.
You are not that naive, are you Gina? Only posts which suit their agendas are posted. That's why Zetta started posting here. But you know that as well as I do.
Zetta is not Viv. But you can keep on thinking whatever you want. Just be sure of something: no one else controls what happens on this blog apart from myself, which is one of the reasons why I stopped posting in other places. Don't think you can use this place to trash Viv or any of my posters because I will not allow it.
If you want to discuss the case, fine. If not, then there are better places, as you well know.

Gina said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Cláudia said...

Gina, as I said, if you want to discuss things related to the case, fine. Talking about posting on the House of Filth, wrongly discussing the identity of my posters or asking me if I think you are a spoof when I was in fact discussing the thread are not included in what you call 'certain issues which are of interest'.

Anonymous said...

Hello all,

Hope - lovely to see you here & well said :-)

Don't have a lot of time to reply this morning but want to wish you all a nice day :-)

Dylan xxx

Cláudia said...

Hi, Dylan!
Hope you're ok.
Also wish you a nice day! :-)
xxxx

Cláudia said...

Gina, the poster you spent most of your unpublished post 'talking' about has an e-mail address you can use to make contact. Those comments you made should be directed at the poster in question and no one else. But somehow I don't think you would ever do that, would you?
As I said, if you have any comments regarding the case, I have no problems with it. Personal considerations and mentioning other places (especially in your case), we all know how it ends up so thanks but no thanks.

Zetta said...

Hi!
I know this is an old thread, but it doesn't fit in with the new one. Guess what I am reading?

It starts:

"It was the Sunday of the Carnival and the sounds of the hunters' shots..."

Cláudia said...

Hi, Zetta!
Just put up another thread.

:-))))

Cláudia said...

Gina, that post was once again about irrelevant things (and a bit repetitive), therefore, not published. If you paid attention and were a bit interested in serious debate, today there have been news on the Madeleine McCann case, as my two lst threads confirm.

Cláudia said...

Since you cannot stop doing what you're doing, Gina, it does. It certainly does.

Very interesting news, btw.

Cláudia said...

Pssst, anon, when you solve your literacy problem, do yourself a favour and read the title of the thread you just tried to post on.
In the meantime, vê lá se vais dar uma que isso passa-te. :-)