Manchester AI Sham and Madeleine McCann

“Oh my God, no, it’s too soon... you’re calling Manchester an AI Sham already?! Have some respect! Think of the families!” - Yes, I know, I know - I know all the feigned cries of faux outrage by rote.

But seriously, it’s not me calling Manchester an “AI Sham”.

It’s the establishment.

That’s what they’ve told us the name of the “killer” is: Jihad Al-Shamie.

i.e., AI Sham Jihad

They’re telling us exactly what this is, as they always do with the staged events, but rarely quite so, er, literally. They’re literally declaring this is a sham event, staged using AI (and the usual crisis actors) to look like Jihad.

In reality, it’s just more spycraft street theatre.

There are all the other usual tells, plot holes, and anomalies in this event, as there always are in these staged productions (that’s on purpose, in true revelation of the method style), and we can expect detailed videos from investigators pulling it all apart in the next few days, whilst the CO gatekeepers work themselves up into a theatrical frenzy with their “Oh my God, not everything’s fake, you know!!!” (or their new “humorous” approach of saying “eVeRytHinG is fAkE”, which is just as comical, astute, and insightful as when they all started changing their Twitter names to “agent”).

As they obviously know, nobody is saying “everything is fake”, merely that “many/most high-profile sensationalist news items are“, but they pretend not to be able to discern the difference, because they’re CO gatekeepers specifically tasked with misrepresenting and rubbishing the views of those they seek to silence. We see you, guys - and guyettes - and you’re not really doing a great job of concealing yourselves, to be honest, which is the good thing about this ever-accelerating slew of psyops - more and more people revealing who, and what, they really are.

Anyway, back to Manchester: nobody who is paying attention is remotely surprised we have a psyop “antisemitic terror attack” in the current climate, because, as I said in my article of just three days ago:

“Note that a lot of Zionist assets pretend to be wildly antisemitic, in order that the public - and law-makers - can react to them with revulsion and demand action is taken. It’s pretty standard problem-reaction-solution. If, as a Zionist, you want more laws against antisemitism, what’s the best way of getting them? Planting assets to be virulently antisemitic, of course, so the establishment has an excuse to clamp down on them with more laws.“

Consequently, and in response to yesterday’s “attack”, the Daily Mail ran a poll, entitled: “Is Britain doing enough to protect its Jewish population?”

Fully 90% of the 22,000+ respondents said no.

Thus reflecting the fact we now have a population very receptive to, and sympathetic towards, the notion that we are going to need a lot more laws to clamp down on the evil scourge of antisemitism.

Problem-reaction-solution. Brutally efficient as always.

Some of the laws we are going to need are going to be focused on restricting free speech, because some speech - evil antisemitic speech, for example, and other deranged ramblings that spew from vile conspiracy theorists - are simply too dangerous to be permitted.

Deranged ramblings like, “Madeleine McCann’s parents killed her and covered it up”.

Because, very quietly and with no media fanfare (as yet, anyway), on the very same day - Yom Kippur - that the Manchester event was staged, another major production made its debut...

The Trial of Julia Wendell (alleged “Madeleine McCann faker“).

It has been reported that Ms. Wendell (/Wandelt / Faustyna), who claims she is the missing British toddler, has been languishing in prison since February, on charges of stalking the McCann family. She pled not guilty at the initial hearing, so the case has gone to trial.

A trial set to last (at least) 15 days.

15 days?! A drawn-out courtroom epic for the “crime” of trying to make contact with a high-profile media couple she believes are her parents? There is no suggestion her attempts at contact were in any way threatening or malicious.

So, something is not quite adding up here. First of all, if Julia is actually a mentally ill fantasist who sincerely believes she is someone she is not, shouldn’t she be receiving urgent psychiatric care rather than being in prison? And secondly, to remand her in custody for the best part of a year, denying her bail, is exceptionally heavy-handed given the nature of her alleged crime. Where were all the “free Deirdre Barlow, I mean Lucy Connolly” type protests for her, I wonder?

Well, there weren’t any, first of all because her case hasn’t been kept high-profile in the media since her “imprisonment”, but also because I very much doubt that she - much like both Deirdre and Lucy - really went to prison at all.

Rather, I believe (again like Deirdre and Lucy) she is an actress playing a part, and I have pretty good reason to believe that, namely her acting profile on a prominent US casting website, where she is described as a TV and film actress from Arizona.

So, I do not believe that this American actress, who is playing the part of a deranged Polish stalker on the world stage, has really been in prison. I believe that she has been cosily at home in Arizona all this time, flown into the UK earlier this week to begin her star turn in the epic courtroom drama that is The Trial of Julia Wendell.

Let’s just be clear that real trials for disturbed youngsters sending a few inappropriate Instagram messages don’t last 15 days.

Show trials for stars on the world stage about to deliver the crescendo of a very important agenda do, though.

As I’ve noted many times, the perennial pantomime of Madeleine McCann has been kept as a high-profile news item for the best part of 20 years, with Madeleine herself as famous as any celebrity, in sharp contrast to every other missing child, who barely warrants a brief mention on the back pages.

The establishment does not invest such a gargantuan amount of time and money into this kind of propagandist performance unless they are expecting a very valuable return.

The argument that “they keep it so high-profile as part of a cover-up” is complete doublespeak nonsense. Establishment cover-ups are exactly that - covered up. Not kept in the papers for twenty years with updates virtually weekly.

If the parents did it and for whatever reason the establishment wanted to protect them, the story would have been suppressed from the start and, within weeks, would have disappeared from any kind of media altogether (if it ever got any media attention at all) and that would be that. Certainly, there is no way that, two decades later, “Madeleine McCann” would be a household name all over the world.

That’s not a cover-up.

That’s a stitch-up, and it is my contention that we are soon going to see exactly how and why we have been stitched up.

We “conspiracy theorists” were meant to believe “the parents did it and covered it up”, and, on that basis, were thrown lots of fabricated “evidence” and planted “clues” to make us invest in this theory.

Then we were supposed to perpetuate the theory all over the internet, including making lots of sly and malicious digs at the McCanns.

The McCanns who are completely innocent, as will be revealed when it is discovered that Madeleine is alive and well.

Julia Wendell insists that she is Madeleine McCann, that she has DNA evidence to support this claim (her latest tests alleging to show a strong link to Gerry McCann of the parent-child variety), and that all she wants is for Gerry himself to take a test to confirm or deny this hypothesis.

Mysteriously, Gerry refuses to do this (so do the people who claim to be her parents), even though it’s a quick, painless, and non-invasive procedure simply involving a cheek swab.

So now, everyone has to go through a lengthy, traumatic court case instead.

Doesn’t really make sense, does it?

Unless and until you consider this is all part of a performance, all part of building maximal suspense and tension, for the dramatic grand finale.

If Gerry had simply taken a test from the start, and it showed no link, that would be that. A non-story that wouldn’t have warranted any media attention at all.

But instead, Gerry refuses to do the test, so Julia has become a star, receiving lots of media attention relating to her claims, and even a turn on top TV talk show, Dr. Phil.

As a result of all this attention the media has obligingly bestowed upon her, Julia has been widely mocked, ridiculed, and become a figure of hate - and she’s even had to go to prison.

As fellow actor, Andrew Tate, once told us, a spell in prison is part of the “hero’s journey”. That’s why manufactured “heroes” on the world stage often pretend to have gone there.

It’s about building the credentials of a figure as a brave, persecuted martyr who has had to endure a terrible ordeal and fight against the odds before finally triumphing.

Well, look at what poor, persecuted Julia has had to go through!

Virtually nobody believes her claims, neither ‘normies’ nor ‘conspiracy theorists’, and many mock her viciously. She’s even had to endure the hell of prison in a foreign country!

And yet, she persists. She doesn’t bend, she doesn’t break, she continues to insist that she is Madeleine McCann.

And just imagine if she is.

Obviously, we can’t know for sure at this stage if that’s where they’re going with this, but it would certainly fulfil an awful lot of agenda items if they did, of the “problem-reaction-solution” variety.

Problem: Conspiracy theorists accused an innocent family of murdering their daughter when she was alive all along,

Reaction: Conspiracy theorists are disgusting vile ghouls about whom something must be done.

Solution: An anti-conspiracy theory law to stop innocent victims of tragedy being harassed by conspiracists.

An anti-conspiracy law like, for example, ‘Eve’s Law‘ that was proposed in response to the trial of conspiracy theorist, Richard D. Hall, accused of harassing survivors of the Manchester Arena “bombing”.

The same Richard D. Hall who has been instrumental in bringing to prominence the “the parents did it and covered it up“ theory about Madeleine McCann.

Can you imagine the shockwaves of horror and revulsion that will follow if tests assert to prove that Julia is in fact Madeleine, that she was never dead, that the parents never killed her, and yet “vile ghouls” like Hall made a living out of perpetuating this false and malicious theory?

It’s one thing saying the British state faked a terror attack for political purposes, but to openly accuse innocent parents of murdering their child?

Utter contempt for Hall, and the many conspiracists who shared his theory, would set in instantly, and the British public would become a seething, frothing, pitch-fork-waving mob, demanding something must be done.

The Daily Mail would run a poll, “is enough being done to control Britain’s conspiracy theorists?”

Most of the population would say no.

Problem-reaction-solution.

So, I think it’s very possible and plausible we may be told - once Gerry finally relents and takes the test, perhaps on orders from the judge - that Julia is indeed Madeleine (the theory being she’s related to Gerry and not Kate, as the couple did IVF using a donor egg).

That would be the crescendo, the grand finale, the plot twist of the century in the world’s longest running and most gripping “child abduction drama”.

Not that Julia really is Madeleine, of course, she’s an actress.

The real Madeleine?

There never was one. CGI, child actor, fakery. The whole “disappearance” was staged from the beginning to ultimately fulfil major political agendas, just like most high-profile, sensationalist news events are.

Note that a producer from ‘Crimewatch‘, the BBC TV show specialising in acted-out crime reconstructions, played a key role on the set of the “Madeleine McCann disappearance”.

Note, also, that Gerry McCann was filmed at the airport on his way to Portugal looking grumpy, and, upon being told to “cheer up Gerry, we’re on holiday”, replied “f**k off, I’m not here to enjoy myself”.

Implying that this was no leisure trip.

It was work.

Gerry McCann, Kate McCann and the rest of the gang are intelligence assets who participated in spycraft theatre.

With the help of veteran Crimewatch producer, Bridget O’Donnell, they staged a reconstruction of a “child abduction”, using a child actor to play the role of the fictional ‘Madeleine’ character (in reality, the McCanns only ever had two children, Sean and Amelie), and the media reported it as real.

It was no more real than any other gripping TV child abduction drama, it’s simply that this one’s been running rather longer.

Ultimately, like Manchester - like all the big, theatrical, epically politically convenient “tragedies” - it’s just been another staged sham.

Thanks for reading! This article was originally published at miriaf.co.uk, which is entirely reader-supported, with no paywalls, adverts, or wealthy corporate backers, meaning your support is what powers this site to keep going. If you enjoyed this article, and would like to read more in the future, please consider…

1. Subscribing monthly at Substack or Patreon (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 these articles to keep being created and is enormously appreciated. Thank you.