madeleinemccanncontroversy Aimoo Forum List | Ticket | Today | Member | Search | Who's On | Help | Sign In | |
madeleinemccanncontroversy > ARCHIVED WEB PAGES > Cristobel Go to subcategory:
Author Content
HiDeHo
  • Rank:Diamond Member
  • Score:2851
  • Posts:2851
  • From:USA
  • Register:26/01/2013 4:34 PM

Date Posted:28/10/2016 12:54 AMCopy HTML

<iframe frameborder="0" hspace="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" tabindex="0" vspace="0" width="100%" id="I0_1477615792126" name="I0_1477615792126" src="https://apis.google.com/u/0/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&annotation=bubble&size=standard&source=blogger%3Ablog%3Aplusone&width=250&hl=en_GB&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwebcache.googleusercontent.com&url=http%3A%2F%2Fcristobell.blogspot.com%2F&gsrc=3p&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.J-c8y3Dm3Kw.O%2Fm%3D__features__%2Fam%3DAQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCOE77c2gNA4q04ToXMvt7SF4LTS6w#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1477615792126&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fwebcache.googleusercontent.com&pfname=&rpctoken=37507038" data-gapiattached="true" title="+1" style="position: static; top: 0px; width: 106px; margin: 0px; border-style: none; left: 0px; visibility: visible; height: 24px;"></iframe>

Wednesday, 26 October 2016

THE McCANNS AND ME



UPDATE - 26.10.16

As expected, my donation button has caused outrage!  So many sharp intakes of breath, I though we were having a typhoon.  I have therefore decided to respond to the main criticisms by category to save us all time.  

To those who say, I am cashing in on a missing child, I am a writer, who by some cruel twist of fate has become shackled to this unfortunate case, for what seems to be an eternity.  I will not lie, it has always been my intention to write about the Madeleine mystery (I still dream of that bestseller) but thus far, it is a story without an ending, and I'm not just going to make one up!  At the moment my Madeleine text is a living narrative, still filled with twists, turns and machinations.  My blog is a work in progress, I value my readers' input as much as my own, it is a journal if you like, which I hope is capturing the zeitgeist. 

As for the morality of writing about a tragic child, my critics should bear in mind, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of journalists writing about tragic children every day of the week. Should child stories be withdrawn from their paypackets?   The Madeleine case is still of interest to thousands, their doing, not mine, and my blog has become a niche corner of the internet where this human interest story can be discussed civilly, rationally as reasonable adults.   

 I have always given my honest and educated opinion on this case, I am one of the (very) few writers to have stood up to the McCann takeover of the media, and for that I am blacklisted.  I have never given in to their demands and I never will, even if it means carving the truth of the lie on a prison wall.  I am as outraged at the injustice in this case as I ever was.  Rightly, or wrongly, I now have a large audience, to whom, I hope, I am providing a service that they cannot get from the mainstream media, an analysis of the true story behind this cover up.  
 
Many writers are now self publishing online and asking for donations, we have a skill we are happy to share for free, but we also have to eat. Much as I hate to be a diva (a lie, I love it!), all we have declare is our talent!  As newpapers and magazines are losing thousands of sales, they too are adding donation buttons. Writing is a profession like any other, if my articles were appearing in the mainstream media, I would be paid.  

Those who say there is far more work involved in filing, indexing and collecting data than there is in creative writing could Not insult me more!  I live, breathe and sleep my work, it fills every moment of my life and I am often at my (worn out) keyboard for up to 14 hours a day.  I'm a perfectionist, and I'm not bragging, because in my mind, I am never good enough, I have the same philosophy as Animal Farm's Boxer, I must work harder.   

My blogs may appear to be simplistic, easy reading that just comes off the top of my head, but that is a skill that has taken decades to perfect.  I take the entire McCann canon, all the heavy reading, facts, data and opinion, and I condense it down into bite size easy reading for those who follow this case, those who are new to it and those who would like an explanation as to what is going on.  Some may not consider that to be worth the price of a cup of coffee, but I'm hoping that there are many decent people out there who will think it is!  


________________________________________

After much tossing, turning and questioning of conscience, I have decided to add a donate button to my blog.  Unfortunately, writing about the case of missing Madeleine McCann can be seriously detrimental to a writer's career!

For me, writing about the Madeleine case is not an option. I know too much about this case to keep silent in the face of such obvious and manipulative lies.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing said Edmund Burke.  And a lot of good men and good women have challenged the establishment lies in the case of missing Madeleine from the start.  The assumption of politicians, their spin doctors and newspaper editors that the public are headline skimming morons they can bend and twist at will offends me.  This generation have grown up in an age of technology and information. we are no longer reliant on censored news. We can and do, seek out alternate opinions that have never been available in our mainstream press (and never will be). 

There are of course, hundreds if not thousands, of decent people out there, who are appalled that a child lost her life, and appalled that our government, our media, and even our police, became complicit in covering up the truth. People who are appalled that the innocent, Goncalo Amaral, Brenda Leyland and every poor sod who's face is splashed across the tabloids as Madeleine's abductor are having their lives destroyed to protect this mother of all crimes.  
 

I don't claim to know what happened to Madeleine, like many of my readers, this case for me has been a journey of discovery.  A bit like The Matrix, do you take the blue pill, or the red pill? Take the blue pill and accept Madeleine was abducted, and the story ends.  Take the red pill, and you are hurled into a nightmare reality - there is no turning back.  I imagine explaining to my trusting old Dad, that the Labour government and the newspapers lied to us and I can see the sickening disappointment on his face.  
 
Unfortunately, writing about this case has not been without personal loss.  Having featured in the McCann Supporters' Blacklist (Death Dossier) for several years and having several troll sites devoted to me, my work will never been accepted by the mainstream.  Ce la vie.  

I have therefore decided to put up a 'donate' button (right hand column), things break down and parts wear out, and I am determined to last this case out until the end!  If you enjoy my blogs and would like to contribute a small amount to its' upkeep, the price of a magazine or a large G&T, it would be much appreciated!  



<iframe width="610" height="60" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" vspace="0" hspace="0" allowtransparency="true" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="true" id="aswift_0" name="aswift_0" style="left: 0px; position: absolute; top: 0px;"></iframe>

Tuesday, 25 October 2016

THE PAEDO LINKS AND THE HATRED

In response to 13:22 on 'Loony Website', I agree the Gasper statements are alarming, so too the evidence volunteered by the social worker Yvonne Martin, but they are not evidence that the tapas children were being abused. The PJ did not release ALL their files, many were held back, and there is a good chance those files contain the more err, sensitive investigations. Obviously investigations that were not pursued because they led nowhere.  

I think the evidence of Yvonne Martin (the social worker) is important because it describes the strange behaviour of Kate McCann and David Payne on the morning of 4th May.  And by strange behaviour, I mean the way Kate, Payne and the rest of the Tapas group closed ranks - that is they shunned the assistance of a British child protection expert on the ground when their need was greatest. With regard to Yvonne Martin's suspicions about David Payne, I tend to think these would have been checked out by both the police and social services.  

The Jon Corner pictures were odd, but then so too is Jon Corner. Like the rest of the McCann mob, he spotted a business opportunity that was too good miss. The wannabe film maker and artiste, probably thought his work on the Madeleine case, would hurtle him into the big league.  As for the make up pictures, little girls love dressing up! Friend of the family and artiste Jon, no doubt had his camera handy and played along with Madeleine's game.  

I doubt very much paedophilia has got anything to do with this case, despite the huge efforts of so many, including the 'authorities' to convince the public that it has. People like Jim Gamble who have tried desperately to link Madeleine's disappearance to online predators. Always a ridiculous concept btw, because at the age of 3, Madeleine didn't use social media.

As for the parents and their friends, I cannot stress enough that these people were 'into each other' not kids!  They spent as little time with their children as they could get away with. Small children have no filters! It is ludicrous to suggest that these kids were being sexually abused in the evening and then handed over to the care of others the following morning.  

Those examining photographs with a magnifying glass searching for hints of abuse have lost the plot! They have certainly put reason, common sense and logical thinking to one side in order to prove their point.  They are projecting figments of their own rather lurid imaginations.  The majority of us do not think as they do, we don't see sexuality in small children and we don't assume a man with a camera is a pervert.  

This case is bizarre, because both the Pro McCann supporters and way too many of the Anti McCanns are determined to push forward a 'lets hang all the paedophiles' agenda.  From the 'Pro' side, one of the first claims made by the parents was that their daughter was taken by a gang of paedophiles.  This was quickly latched onto by the press and various police agencies and charities, who coincidentally, also want to convince the public their children are in constant danger.   

The McCanns of course, have been looking for a villain to blame for Madeleine's disappearance from day 1, Jim Gamble is always looking for reasons to seize people's computers, and police agencies and charities are always looking for cash to combat the alleged hidden danger of all these paedophiles lurking in bedsits and cyber cafes. Apparently enough children go missing each year to fill an inner city school.  Who knew?  

Many of the Antis do actually hate the McCanns.  In the fullest sense of the word, along with all it's scary connotations.  Not only do they want them burned at the stake, they want them (and everyone like them) to be humiliated and scorned.  Not dissimilar to the feelings the McCanns and their supporters had for Brenda Leyland and still have for Goncalo Amaral.  I doubt there is anything more humiliating or degrading than to be accused of sexually abusing children, therefore it is an inevitable accusation when accompanied by intense hatred.  Chuck in these people hid the child's body and carried on with their holiday for 5 days, and the monstering is complete.

But I don't want to be too harsh, whilst the psychotic hatred is indeed psychotic, the hatred felt by many is understandable when compared to  public feeling for convicted child murderers.  Child murder arouses feelings of passion and anger in most of us, feelings that are beyond our control. Even as a committed pacifist and wuss, I know that I could not be in a room with Ian Huntley without wanting to physically attack him.  

Some who have followed and studied this case struggle to get beyond the 'evil' that went on that night, that is the reality of whatever it was that happened to the poor little girl that made her disappear.  For myself, it is an issue that I try not to think about too intensely, because I know that emotion can distort reasoning.  I want to understand this case from a rational, academic, perspective, with my own personal feelings set aside.  

I think what grated for many was the almost joyous way the parents behaved and indeed thrived, in the days and weeks following Madeleine's disappearance. Pleas for publicity and cash, rather than pleas for on the ground searchers.  None of it was 'natural', but pointing that out became taboo. Who knows how parents of a missing child should act was the argument put forward by the defenders.  The obvious answer was, well most of us would have pretty good idea and it would include personally digging up the surrounding area with our bare hands.  

There is much about Gerry and Kate that puts people's backs up.  Despite all the 'kids were perfectly safe' propaganda, most are still very uncomfortable with the McCanns form of child minding.  Gerry's 'it would have been worse if ALL 3 were taken', was shocking as it was being used to defend his parenting skills. If all 3 had been killed in a fire, there would be no defence!  Aggh, I'm going down a path I didn't want to.  Reasons to dislike K&G, there are too many to list, but none worthy of sharpening up the pitchforks.  

Quite obviously in this case, any hint from the police and authorities that Gerry and Kate were involved could set off a media frenzy and quite possibly, an ugly, public backlash from those who were taken in.  And the backlash would not only involve the families, it would affect every politician, police chief, celebrity and expert who gave their full support to the parents.  

There are many reasons I believe for allowing the case to hang in limbo. Time is probably the most effective way to allow an angry public to move on.  If and when the case is ever solved, it will probably be announced in the left hand column, page 6 of a local newspaper. As I have said many times, police the world over, accept that there are occasions when they have to playing the waiting game.  

The lack of a result in the McCann case is far from unusual, but the conspiraloons simply cannot accept this.  They have done their own investigations and found the parents guilty.  Their simple minds cannot understand why the police have not acted on the information they have supplied or thanked them publically for solving the case.  Bennett believes he should be wearing ermine by now whilst publishers are in a bidding war for his book 'Homos and Paedos Everywhere'.    

But of course, I'm not immune to the rather tacky, greedy character traits of the parents.  Gerry and Kate are probably the least likeable people I can think of.  As a grumpy old bird, I have zero tolerance for people who use their victim status to manipulate others.  The McCanns have made it their life's work, in fact, at one time, they were the MSM's first point of call victims for any tragedy. Who suffered the most from the lawless press?  'Me, me, me' shout Gerry and Kate.  

However, I think it is important for anyone interested in this case to look carefully at BOTH sides.  I don't mean the abduction story, which is clearly bollox, I mean from a human perspective and the way in which it affects the families involved.  We are not Judge and Jury, and we certainly shouldn't judge these people on the conspiraloon theories of Bennett, HideHo and Textusa.  Theories based on limited access to almost 10 year police files.  Kudos to the creativity, but in real investigations you can't just fill in the gaps with memories of News of the World headlines.  And sexing up the disappearance of a child goes beyond crass and into the area of abhorrent.  

Those who feel hatred to the intensity where they want their enemies boiled in oil, really do need to have a lie down with a mind improving book.  And I include myself in this when I think of Ian Huntley.  He couldn't control his madness, but I can control mine, that's what sets us apart.  In the case of Huntley, we know what happened (the bastard), but in the Madeleine case, we don't.  Those trying to spice the story up by saying the child's body was stored for 5 days while the group continued their holiday are in fact stirring up hatred.  For them the rocks already being thrown at the parents are not enough, there must be something darker and more murky than an accident.  

I think it is right that we should continue to challenge every lie put forward by to promote the fake abduction.  It is wrong on every level that innocent men are having their lives wrecked by accusations that they took Maddie.  And it's wrong on every level that the parents, and indeed, countless others, have profited from this child's disappearance, knowing that she was never in fact missing.

Neither the McCanns or anyone involved in the real conspiracy are getting away with anything.  They are already living with a Tell Tale Heart, and they must spend the rest of their lives as their alter ego, religious nut job, goody two shoes, middle class Stepford family they created for their media campaign.  Never to laugh, smile, or have a humdinger row for ever more, or gawd forbid, miss church on Sunday.  All of the aforementioned would give me the screaming abdabs!  

Meanwhile, hatred is a negative emotion that does far more harm to the hater than the hatee.  For one thing, the object of the hatred is usually blissfully unaware of the demonic thoughts going on in the hater's head.  Even if they knew, those with self esteem, would see the problem as the hater's, not theirs. I actually find it quite amusing, and indeed a tad flattering, that I have enemies out there pouring over my every word looking for something to be offended by.  I occasionally toss them a juicy bit of ribeye to keep to keep them going, lol. 

Hating strangers isn't rational and hating people for a crime we think they have committed is immoral and uncivilized.  Especially if those beliefs are based on the crazed rantings of a man who is quite clearly off his trolley*.  Inventing lurid scenarios to make the villains more villainish and the crime more heinous reveals more about the armchair detective than the crime they are 'researching'.  







*Yes, I know, lol, I need help!  I really do try my hardest not to hate anyone, but in Bennett's case, I keep losing the battle ;)

Wednesday, 19 October 2016

FREEDOM OF SPEECH OR THE RIGHT TO BE OFFENDED?



 


It seems to me that Freedom of Speech is under more threat today than it has been for a couple of hundred years.  It has been replaced by the Right to be Offended, some are even going so far as to ban words from our lexicon, the words in the Red Flag should now be sung 'while namby pambies flinch, and people with alternate opinions, sneer' we'll keep the Red (no offence to ginger people) flag flying here.  

Take this whole issue of misogyny. As an old bird (I can call myself that because I am one), I often have a chat and giggle with other old birds, and all of us (without exception), loved getting wolf whistles, saucy winks and offers to join the mile high club (Ok, made the last one up, but it remains on the wish list).  Too few men as it is, have the guts to suggest a quicky before work, ffs, the last thing feisty gals need are more laws to nobble the rest of them. It's no wonder most dating is done online these days, 'come and see my etchings' would see a young man imprisoned and placed on the Sex Offenders Register.

Of course, there will always be the creepy types out there who think flirting copping a feel and drooling 'cooorrr' is a turn on, eg. Donald Trump, but this is where stilettoes and elbows should be put to full use.  Actually the DT reference kind of negates my argument, I can't think of anything more traumatising than being groped by Donald Trump. 

But back to Freedom of Speech.  It's like everything George Orwell predicted is coming true.  Words are being erased or their meanings changed.  The freedom of information brought to us by the WorldWideWeb, has given a voice to everyone.  There are no valid or moral reasons for the 'authorities' to deprive individuals of internet access (their ultimate goal) and they couldn't even if they wanted to.  The only way in which to challenge those online who hold subversive views, is to accuse them of 'trolling'.  The more they convince the public that 'trolling' is an evil and heinous crime, the more likelihood of passing laws that will enable them to police the internet and round up their targets.  

Which takes us back to Freedom of Speech.  I am unashamedly a fan of Celebrity Big Brother, but I found the eviction of Christopher Biggins, deeply disturbing.  I didn't agree with his views or those of Renee (?), but I would have liked to see the discussion develop as it would in real life and as in real life, the better argument would win.  I'm afraid I have little time or patience with people who go through life carrying their Right to be Offended like a banner.  They leap on their opponent's argument, sifting through it with a fine tooth comb, or a wordsearch for Woman, Jew, Race, Age etc.  Who was that wailing creature weeping for, the entire Jewish race or her need for camera time? 

As for CB's views on bisexuals, OK, they don't go along with popular opinion, but for all the bisexuals out there (and those who have dabbled), it would have made an interesting and enlightening discussion.  Quite clearly CB is not a hate preacher, and no doubt his views would have mellowed or changed if offered alternate opinions.  Unfortunately, CB's views are representative of a small minority, who's prejudices will no doubt continue because their views were stifled rather than challenged. It's like smacking a toddler without telling them what they did wrong.  

But the CBB incident is but a symptom.  Those who demand the Right to be Offended are starting to outnumber those of us who couldn't give a monkey's and it's their rules that going to be enforced.  Having been trolled, stalked and harassed for almost 10 years, I can confidently confirm that it is only detrimental to your health and well being if you allow it to be.  Once you understand the problem lies with the misfit, weirdo, chickenshit, not yourself, everything falls back into perspective.  

I find this move to prohibit words, language, comedy, lively discussion, sinister and undoubtedly motived by something evil.  For example, I would much rather see the Labour Party have a healthy debate about anti Semitism, Misogyny etc, unhindered by rules that restrict the language and the words used.  This whole idea of nicey, nicey politics, backed up with penalties appears to have gagged politicians to the point where the only means of communication they have left is a right hook.  

Stalking or harassing another individual online or anywhere else is against the Law.  There is no case for new Laws or the strengthening of existing laws to weed out those deemed subversive.  All those offended by what they read online have the right to reply, as we all do and they have the means to block the offenders.  Having your enemies imprisoned shouldn't be an option.

To those pleading the Right to be Offended, I would ask, why should the social media use of billions worldwide be restricted because your haven't got the social or internet skills to handles yourselves online.  You may choose to live in a sanitised bubble, but that would not be the choice for most of us.


Sunday, 16 October 2016

WHY THE ANTI MCCANNS WERE REVILED

Following the McCann case has often led to one of those big life questions, 'is it me, or is it them?'.  Considering I spend most of my life out of step with the rest of the world, it wasn't a particularly big deal, but I have to say, it was quite unsettling to discover the 'antis' hated me almost as much as the Pros, if not more! 

And I don't just mean mild dislike, I mean pure unadulterated hatred of the creepy kind.  They don't seem to realise that all that hatred means nothing, they don't know me, but it is probably eating them alive.  It's why I have been less mean of late, I actually pity them, hanging onto that anonymity may become very difficult in the days that lie ahead.  

I have to say, that the way in which the 'anti McCanns' became so reviled, so quickly, confused me.  I put it all down to the unbelievably successful McCann Media campaign.  Hands up, it has taken me a number of years to fully understand why those defending the McCanns were so emotive, and why they were so angry at McCann critics.  I'll admit in those early days, I was caught up in the excitement of unravelling a crime, and I actively sought out websites and forums who could see the same as I could.  It was a topic you could not discuss at the water cooler or a party without starting a fight!

Every national newspaper's comments sections were buzzing, the Mirror especially, and when Clarence had them shut down, thousands flocked to the 3 Arguidoes and then onto other forums as the founders of the 3As fell out.  All and any accusations by the McCanns that there has ever been an 'organised' campaign against them would be ridiculous, most of the antis hate each other as much as they hate the McCanns.  

I didn't dare post in the Mirror forum, I felt completely out of my depth, I had already got my fingers burned in the CBB chatroom, and bookchat had FA to do with books, but the McCann world was a battleground!  I cut my teeth in the completely uncensored free for all that was the AOL Europe Board. As old and wizened as I was, I had no idea there were so many lunatics out there disguised as normal people and UKIP voters.  The board was very right wing and mostly made up of neo Nazis and McCann supporters.  In retrospect, describing myself as a Marxist/Feminist in my profile was never going to make me popular.  

As horrendous and God awful as it sounds, the place became completely addictive, you could get a row with anyone any time of the day or night.  The antis were mostly made up of angry mums and nans, who made no bones about their feelings towards Kate and Gerry. I often found their comments a bit strong, but I liked them nonetheless and during especially bloody battles I was glad to have them as comrades in arms!  The pros (McCann supporters) were alternately known as the 'Selecteds' - that's because we caught them out trying to set up a private forum that excluded the rest of us!  How dare they!  The whole Europe and YGL sagas went on for at least 5 years!  We did however have truces during the holidays when we would try not to be obnoxious, happily they never lasted.  

But I have digressed.  Back in 2007, thousands of the antis were as angry and sickened by the McCanns actions as many are where crimes against children are involved.  It was not only necessary, it was imperative that the McCanns and the 'group' were protected.  As human beings we have to understand that. Because what can happen, and what did happen, was the story was taken up by a wild eyed extremist who wants the return of hanging and flogging to our town squares.  

All those angered and appalled at the blatant injustice in this case have been drawn in and manipulated by people who claim they want justice, but in reality, are only seeking fame and infamy for themselves.  They want to be the one who 'cracks' the case.  Bennett thought he could tag onto the golden egg that was Madeleine's name by setting up the Madeleine Foundation.  He wanted a slice of those 50billion hits the McCann website were getting.

This case has also attracted those who are interested in the cases of historic sexual abuse.  I too had a link because of my memoir Cry and You Cry Alone, I lived in a children's home run by two psychopaths, an ex Jesuit monk who practiced Opus Dei for everyone, the boys especially, and sexually frustrated nun who had the hots for him.  My abuse wasn't sexual, it was the batterings I took for not kowtowing to their freaky rules.  

I've never given any credence to the whole 'paedophile ring' theory in this case. These people were going out of their way to get other people to look after their kids, including trained nannies.  Abusers keep the kids hidden away, they don't risk them having conversations with 'outsiders' and they don't organise sporty holidays where the kids are rarely in their company! What most parents of young children need, more than anything else, is a break from the kids!  Again, don't excited Textusa, I'm talking about the mental stimulation of adult company. That doesn't make them bad people or even bad parents.  As a young mum, I never wanted to miss the craic, my motto was happy mum = happy child.  

So why did the public hate the 'antis'?  I try to imagine how I would feel if a forum or a group of concerned citizens attacked, Kerry Needham, for example.  I would probably be very angry with the attackers, the words shame on you, comes to mind.  So now I must apply that train of thought to those who truly believe the McCanns are innocent.  Their belief may be based on the biased headlines of the MSM and successful marketing campaign of Team McCann, but if they don't want to listen to alternate opinion, they won't.  Some people have very closed minds, it's gutting, but something we have to accept or go crazy.      
Where several infamous antis have gone way off track is by their deluding themselves that their hmmm, 'research' has solved this case where two police forces have failed. I have no doubt Bennett already has his Nobel Prize acceptance speech at the ready.  Much as I hate pointing out again and againTony Bennett is as mad as a box of frogs, too much of his nonsense is still around misleading those who are searching for the truth.  Richard D. Hall was his biggest, and most gullible, mark.  

But the purpose of this blog was to pick up on a point made by John Blacksmith in the previous comments.  These 'researchers' (pretentious twats) have invaded the lives of the innocent citizens who gave statements to the Portuguese police.  They believe calling their stalking and harassment of witnesses in a criminal investigation 'research' somehow validates their vile and immoral behaviour.  It doesn't.  Nowadays, we can all pretty much stalk whoever we want, but we don't.  Why?  Because the majority of us have a moral compass and the empathy to understand how our actions will affect others.  

Unfortunately, whilst there were thousands and thousands questioning the justice in this case, we were all judged by the antics of the malicious and despicable Tony Bennett. First with his spurious private legal against the parents, then with his distasteful publicity seeking antics handing out leaflets in their home town.  We were all tarred with the same brush and despised from then on.

Bennett boasts that CMoMM is the best McCann forum on the www.  But it isn't, it is the most grotesque.  Now that every intelligent poster has been banned or kicked out, all that remains are the lobotomised diehards.  Their legacy will be in there with Stop the Myths and JATKY2, bloodsucking ghouls looking for victims.  

I found it quite poignant when JB asked 'what can the nannies do'?  Indeed.  As witnesses in an ongoing investigation, they cannot say anything.  My heart goes out to them, as it does to all those targeted by CMoMM.  I have nothing but respect for them and in fact all of those put through hell by the conspiraloons. Their quiet dignity has not gone unnoticed.  

It may be when this is all over that those libelled by Bennett and CMoMM will have recourse to justice of some kind and who could blame them.  However, they seem to have the good sense to know their best course of action is to avoid these vipers like the plague.  Even the two words, fuck off, would send them into a feeding frenzy.  

I honest to God do not know what Operation Grange are up to.  I don't quite buy into the 'they are all involved in the cover up' theory.  I still have enough faith left in human nature, and indeed the police, to believe that the victim, Madeleine is still the focus of their investigation. 

Tuesday, 11 October 2016

LOONEY WEBSITE SOLVES MADDIE MYSTERY

[In response to comment on previous blog]

Many thanks 22:07, I don't bother very much with CMoMM these days, whilst it makes a good study of psychopathy, it's stuck in an endless cycle of rehash and there is rarely anything of interest.

I had a look at that thread and the letter sent by 'Jill' (Bennett) - obviously everything signed off by him goes straight in the shredder, lol. OMG, my sympathy lies with the recipient, imagine having to read that pile of old bunkum? I'd rather have my toenails extracted one by one, or go waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay!

Who the fffff... do they think they are? Its like a crowd of drunks having an extended game of Cluedo then presenting themselves at the local police station, saying we've solved it!  It was the butler in the pantry with the dagger, hic.  The lack of signatures to their petitions shows they are not representative of the public. And what is it they want?  I'm afraid this is where we get into pitchfork territory.  Given the hostile and aggressive manner of the CMoMM forum, it is clear that several of them are taking this matter far too personally.  

Because this case involves a small child, it is emotive and attracted extremists and vigilantes.  Some people feel so passionately about child protection that reason and logic flies out the window.  We are programmed to protect our young, it is not a bad thing, but some unscrupulous people will go out of their way to harvest that anger and need for retribution.  That is, they will use it to stir up an angry mob.  In the case of Madeleine, that manipulation of public opinion is prevalent in both camps.   

There comes a point where we all have to ask ourselves why we are still here?  As a manic depressive with OCD, my own 'addiction' was a way in which to blot out the real world.  My need to solve the puzzle that was Madeleine's disappearance, was as strong as my need to get to the final page of an Agatha Christie novel.  I have to say I reached the 'beyond reasonable doubt' stage many moons ago, but like everyone else, that final 'how they did it' part remains elusive.  

I think like many of the antis, that there is something integrally wrong in our society when a little girl can go missing without explanation.  We are civilised people who defend the vulnerable from the wicked, it makes us human.  Had the McCanns been honest at the beginning, the world would have been gentle with them.  Accidents and even crimes of passion, happen - the McCanns claim Kate was offered a 'serve 2 years' deal, a compassionate option if true.

However, it is all the crimes committed since that irk the most.  The way in which they paraded themselves as victims and used the loss of their daughter to amass a large personal fortune.  None of the public's very generous donations have been used to assist anyone outside of the 'family', in fact, it would seem, the bulk of the fund has been used to protect the reputation of the parents.  And worse, much has been used to destroy the name, reputation, family and life of the detective who was simply doing his job, looking for Madeleine.  They continue with their sheer bloody minded agenda to destroy Goncalo Amaral, as it appears they have now lodged another Appeal.  

For myself, and I'm sure with many others, this case has opened our eyes to a  whole new world.  Six months into reading everything I could find on this case, I began to see what a phoney society we are living in.  It was a revelation moment.  Not too dissimilar to when I entered higher education in my late 30's and discovered religion was bollox, movies send out hidden messages and our society is ruled by newspaper barons.  Who knew? 

Despite all of that, I still believed that we had the greatest justice system in the world, the best police and the least corrupt politicians (60's indoctrinationeducation) and a basically free press.  Can't believe I was once that naïve. This case has demonstrated how easy it is for the establishment, or indeed anyone with a proactive family, to manipulate public opinion using the MSM.  

Unfortunately, for them, the internet has done away with borders and for all the UK tabloids publishing McCann propaganda, the real story from Portugal was getting through and spreading like wildfire.  Ergo, for the last ten years we have been watching McCann and McCann .v. WorldWideWeb.  I mean ffs, who employs lawyers to watch social media 24/7?  How come two doctors don't have any friends or colleagues with the guts to use the words 'paranoia' and 'bottomless pit'?  

Those who ask why we are still here, don't seem to understand that what has been seen cannot be unseen.  We have watched in astonishment as undeserving people have been elevated and enriched by this tragedy.  The parents especially who are still demanding £400k from the former detective and public recognition for their supposed good works.  These parents have been fundraising since the moment their daughter disappeared.  Whilst the locals and holidaymakers physically searched for their missing child, they were plotting on how to make Maddie's face go viral.  'Did you go out there and physically search?' 'well we wanted to, but we were really busy' says Kate.  Wtf takes priority over searching for your missing child, grrrrr.  

But I try to avoid getting personal, gawd knows, the McCanns and their wider family have enough to worry about, but hearing that they are continuing with their libel actions against Goncalo Amaral, sticks in my craw. I cannot understand how those police officers working on Operation Grange can stay silent whilst another detective, just like them, is being persecuted by this manipulative couple.   I do of course appreciate the police have a duty to protect everyone, including the McCanns, it's their failure to stop and prevent crime.  The Fund continues, gullible people are still being fleeced (every penny will go on the search) and the financial claims against Goncalo Amaral are immoral, if not illegal.  Not to mention of course, the ruthless way in which they demanded that an example be made of an innocent member of the public and the deed was done. That should scare all of us.

Anyhow, returning the multi paged diatribe of Jill Havern (Tone the Bore), I seriously hope the government department tasked with reading the tripe (poor sods) have a loons and nutters post bin marked 'read later - if ever'.  With Tony Bennett a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.  He has managed to hone his targets down to civil servants who are, by the law of this land, obliged to read his lengthy epistles.  We can only hope the suicide rate among that particular demographic doesn't rise dramatically.  If I were them, I'd choose head in the gas oven every time.  

The only one who doesn't realise Bennett is talking complete twaddle is Bennett and maybe Richard Hall and a small assortment of (harmless, we hope), right wing psychopaths and loons.  Given the volume of correspondence from Tone the Bore, I would imagine the recipients give them little regard.  I noticed on that thread, that another poster had received a more detailed reply than 'Jill', which I found a tad amusing.  

Bennett is drawn to this case because he believes some sort of deviant sex is involved.  In his loony creationist head, he believes he is surrounded by sinners enjoying a lot more carnal knowledge than himself.  He is fire and brimstone, a preacher without a pulpit or an audience.  He deprives himself of television and popular culture, and he wants it banned for everyone else.  

Who can calculate the amount of damage he has done to the official search for Madeleine.  I have no doubt his antics alone built the wall around this case. The constant bragging that he has a huge audience of angry justice seekers is effectively a nasty threat.  The authorities have no option but to increase the McCanns' protection.  The McCanns have struggled to provide evidence that they have been targeted or threatened as a result of the Goncalo Amaral's book, all they had was Bennett's Madeleine's Foundation.

The truth is, the majority of people who do not believe the McCanns have not made retribution against the McCanns, their life's work.  That would be creepy.  They want to see justice for Madeleine, by they want to see it via the democratically agreed justice procedures.  Many, myself included, have a real distaste for vigilantism, it seems to attract all the wrong kind of people.  

 

Thursday, 6 October 2016

THAT SUMMERS AND SWAN BOOK

[in reply to a comment on the previous blog]

Thanks for reminding us of the Summers and Swan 'McCanns are innocent get it' book, with its chapter dedicated to the scourge of the 21st century, internet trolls.  Doubt Summers and Swan will be too happy to be reminded of their sell out, it was hardly their finest hour.

The whole purpose of the S&S book seemed to be to stir up public hatred against the critics of Kate and Gerry McCann. They officially introduced the word 'hater' to the English lexicon, to describe anyone who refused to be taken in by the obvious faked abduction and subsequent cover up.

The S&S book was in fact laying the groundwork to purge the internet of McCann critics, it was hoped through the eloquence of their words, S&S would sway public opinion back to the way it was in 2007. Not only to revive the unprecedented generosity to the K&G Fund, but also to incite anger and hatred towards anyone 'trolling' the officially cleared parents online. I use the word 'trolling' very loosely here, because it is one of those 'catch all' words that will be used constantly by those who want to police the internet. And of course Gerry and Kate claim not to use social media, ergo, strictly speaking, they cannot be trolled.

The campaign to keep Madeleine (or themselves) in the public eye, was made up of several components, the most vigorous faction, headed by a megalomaniac who believed he had the power to control the internet and the news, and who demands that any criticism of himself and his good wife should lead to instant arrest.  The sane among us would have told him to get a grip and maybe have a lie down with a mind improving book.  Those on £300 per hour however, tell him it's perfectly feasible, and would he like to pay by instalments.  

The launch of the Summers and Swan book was timed to coincide with Jim Gamble's clamp down on the internet trolls who keep reminding the world that Madeleine wasn't abducted.  In Martin Brunt's feature, Mr. Gamble, in his strict, authoritarian Policeman mode, told all the critics of Kate and Gerry, we are coming to get you.  Unfortunately, S&S failed to turn public opinion around, their definitive book on the Madeleine disappearance was met with scorn and derision, each and every one of their 'parents are innocent' assertions swiftly deconstructed and ridiculed by real experts, in their Amazon reviews.

The McCanns however seem to have a thing for runaway trains, so part II, Sky News went ahead anyway with Mr. Newsman himself, Martin Brunt exposing the evil behind those members of the public posing as ordinary people.  Mr. Gamble could not hide his sheer glee as he congratulated Martin on twitter for exposing public enemy number 1, a quiet, unassuming, middle aged lady in a pretty Leicestershire village.  Unfortunately, no-one was saying, thanks Jim, thanks Martin, we can all now sleep safely in our beds, they were horrified that Sky News even considered this non story as being of public interest, and appalled at the cruelty behind it.  

Summers and Swan may be that rarity, well heeled writers, but that one book has now made their entire body of work unreadable. For me at least, I am an absolute stickler for the truth, if an author distorts even one aspect of the facts in order to fit their own conclusions, I stop reading.  My reading list is so extensive I have to be discerning and nothing irks quite so much as having my time wasted. I was once having what I thought was a sensible telephone conversation with a McCann 'anti' when 45 minutes in, she told me Madeleine was a clone.  It was one of those 'doh' moments, and 45 minutes I will never get back.  I'm afraid I view the S&S Madeleine book in the same way.  

I have to say there is a certain amount of pleasure watching the McCann spin team tie themselves up in knots, but the plan to wipe out the McCann sceptics online was cold, calculated and cruel.  Despite the fact that S&S were unable to stir up an angry mob, Sky News went ahead anyway. It chills me to the bone that not one of them were compassionate enough to consider that what they were doing could have such a tragic outcome.  And let's not be in any doubt here, Brenda Leyland was to be the first of many, the death dossier contained dozens of names, in my own case they had over 100 pages on me.  The death dossier, or as it used to be known, the blacklist, was publically available for years, an additional CV if you like for any employer checking out candidates on social media.  The McCann supporters have always used threats of exposure to silence online critics. 

Have to say, I was a little disappointed not to have been included in the 'troll' section of the S&S book, especially as their researchers had provided so much information.  It could be because I am a survivor of the Catholic care system, bipolar and known for past alcohol and substance abuse and a smidgeon of promiscuity.  I was a bit of a party girl, what can I say? hic.  Of course the dossier compilers have used all of the aforementioned to pillory me for years, in their Amish heads, anyone who lives outside of the designated Christian man, woman 2.4 children combo, is quite clearly a lunatic.  Unhappily for them, I wear my lunacy with pride, not only do I not regret my wild past, I wish I had done a bit more.  

It may be that my CSA survivor status spared me a public door stepping by Martin Brunt, but I think it is more likely to have been my big gob. I'm what my friends and family euphemistically describe as 'a loose cannon'.  My sons have actually compiled a list of things I can and cannot do and say when out with them in public!  I cannot be too critical of them because I remember compiling a similar list for my own mother, and just like her, I'm having great fun doing the opposite ;)  I'm too honest for my own good, my dad used to tell me, and he was right, it's been positively detrimental, among my funeral songs, I have 'Whyyyyyyy can't I keep my big mouth shut', from the batterings I took in the convent, to the batterings I take online, my honesty always manages to offend someone.  I will have to include in that offended group, several past bosses.  It seems the question, 'aren't you getting paid £200 an hour to do this?' takes you straight past Go,  and out the revolving doors.   

But let's get back to the next part of the spin doctors cunning plan.  It was hoped through the S&S book, the public at large would once again feel overwhelming sympathy for eternal victims Kate and Gerry, and their outrage would be captured in a call for a clampdown on internet trolls.  However, apart from the shrill mean spirited comments of Carol Malone, the best they managed to stir up was 'who gives a feck'. Kate and Gerry have hogged the front pages for years, how much more do they want ffs?  The love the public felt for Kate and Gerry in the summer of 2007, is now worse than hate, it is indifference.

Ten years on the publically funded investigation into Madeleine's disappearance continues.  Whilst it is true that the McCann family and indeed all of those involved must, as far as humanely possible, be protected from a media storm on the scale of that which took hold when the story broke.  No matter what we on the internet know, or have discovered, we are not the Law.  Quite rightly, everyone is innocent until proved guilty, and everyone deserves a fair trial.

However, it is wrong on every level to sweep those wicked crimes under the carpet.  Especially a crime that reached the scale of this one.  All the great and good who rushed to Mr and Mrs McCanns assistance must somehow squirm out of their past gushing enthusiasm.  For myself, I no longer believe a word Donal MacIntyre or Mark Williams Thomas says, crime experts, pah! Dr. Sharon Leal, how far back have you taken the science of lie detection?  It's the assumption that we the audience are idiots that I find most offensive.  

If Operation Grange remains live to preserve the myth that this was a stranger abduction, then questions must be asked of those signing the cheques.  Aren't there current, solveable, cases they could be working on?  Why are they wasting resources and manpower on a dead duck?  It is not the job of Scotland Yard detectives to preserve the dignity of politicians and ex police chiefs, their job, first and foremost, is to uncover the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance and bring those responsible to justice.
 
As for Gerry and Kate, they are already living in a prison of their own making, so too all those closely involved in that fateful holiday.  That kind of hell must be akin to Edgar Allen Poe's Tell Tale Heart, something we wouldn't wish on our worst enemies.  In a strange way, I actually feel sympathy for them, they can never go back to being the care free thirtysomething doctors they once were.  In choosing the path of deception, they sealed their fate.  They have plastered their own faces all over the globe, and not in a good 'A' lister film star way, but in a way that castes suspicion over themselves for ever more.  

However, before I start getting maudlin about the infamous pair, I have to remind myself that they have maliciously and vindictively set out to inflict misery and fear on anyone who crosses them.  Their happy clappy, Christian charity fund raising persona is just as phoney as that of Jimmy Savile and Lance Armstrong.  And for a while there, they had a good thing going.  The Fund was growing into a large corporation, and Gerry was styling himself the UK John Walsh. With the Mr and Mrs as the faces of Missing Children, they were looking at a multi million industry charity with Madeleine becoming the face of Christmas (and all major holidays) with badges and t-shirts available.  

In not bringing any charges, or disclosing the results of their investigation, Operation Grange are effectively allowing the cover up to continue.  That is the raising of funds and the persecution of their Portuguese colleague, Goncalo Amaral.  This fine mess cannot continue ad infinitum.  There are other crimes that need solving and other children that need finding.  

Tuesday, 4 October 2016

PEE IN THE POT OR GET OFF IT

Two years ago this week, Gerry McCann, the father of a missing child, demanded that an example be made of the internet 'trolls' he claimed were hounding and threatening his family online.  The McCann family or a 'group of concerned citizens' had compiled a dossier of 'offenders' and ex head of CEOP Jim Gamble and Sky's Martin Brunt took it from there. This was Jim Gamble's cleansing of social media at it's finest and a taster of his own particular form of justice. 

The victim they selected, Brenda Leyland, hadn't in fact committed any crime, she, like myself and thousands of others simply refused to accept the establishment line that Madeleine McCann was abducted by a stranger.  The McCanns and those who assist them, truly believed they could stamp out all their critics with a gang of thugs patrolling the internet and via hard cash in the libel courts. To be fair, for a while there they succeeded.  

Unfortunately for Gerry McCann, Jim Gamble and Martin Brunt, their jackboot, vigilante tactics appalled the public, whatever Brenda had done, she did not deserve a public execution.  They selected Brenda because she was 'ordinary', but it was that ordinariness that made her everyone's mum, nan and aunty - the McCann couple, already seen as cold, were now chilling.

It is bizarre that two years on, Operation Grange seem as far from a conclusion as they were at the outset but probably not surprising.  The grisly details of what happened the night Madeleine disappeared have become the back story, it's what happened from that night onwards, that will make the Chilcott report look like a couple of hours of light reading.  

The incumbent Blair government perverted the course of justice.  There is no nice, or euphemistic way of putting it.  It was obvious to the first two Portuguese policemen on the scene that the abduction was staged, and ten years on, to anyone who looks at the facts without the 'but they are such a nice couple' blinkers, it still is.  The problem Operation Grange have, is that once they point the finger at Gerry and Kate, the entire house of cards will collapse.

What was said during Gerry's one to one chats with PMs Blair and Brown?  Or indeed between Kate and Cherie?  One thing we can be sure of, every word will be kept verbatim.  Are we to believe that two British Prime Ministers, with all the country's top advisors, police and Special Branch, were taken in by Gerry and Kate?  Not only were they taken in, they put the full services of the establishment at Team McCann's disposal.  That's an Oops right up there with Okily Dokily Mr. Bush.  

How many New Labour cabinet ministers were schmoozing the McCanns?  Or police chiefs attending their fund raising events?  Will the highly experienced and decorated Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe and Jim Gamble explain how they were so misled by a couple of tricksters the average housewife could spot within seconds?  The unveiling of a fake abduction would reveal a sea of red faces and a scramble by those who should have known better to find excuses for supporting such an obvious scam. 

I kind of get the predicament Operation Grange finds themselves in and the difficulties they must have in releasing public statements.  At some point they will have to pee in the pot or get off it.  It has been clear for some time that OG are not looking for an abductor, which translates, 'we know who's responsible but we don't have enough to prosecute'.  Gerry's 'Nooooo evidence' mantra seems to be holding up quite well, but you can't keep throwing public money at an investigation that's going nowhere.  

Unfortunately, while the silence of Operation Grange might temporarily hold back the floodgates, (who dare publish while Gerry and Kate have so much on so much power over so many - including Amazon?), the walls of the dam could give at any time, and the entire team could look like procrastinating fools. You can imagine the water cooler chat, 'Seriously! Scotland Yard's finest didn't know?', following The Sun's serialisation of Kate's latest memoir 'Gotcha You Mugs!'.  

Those of us who know more about this case than is healthy, would argue the 'No Evidence' point quite vigorously, a quick google of Madeleine McCann, will not only throw up every rational argument for why the parents were involved, it will do it in alphabetical order and with pictures.  

Whatever is going on behind the scenes in an effort to limit the damage when Madeleine hits the headlines again, should not be used to take out members of the public.  And vigilant groups, even if they are 'establishment' ones, should not have the power to destroy lives.  

If I were Brenda's family, I would still be mad as hell, but I respect their right to privacy.  I think unless you understand the full horrors of the abuse of power in Madeleine's name, we 'McCann geeks' will always seem a little strange. My own adult sons think I am quite bonkers.  When justice finally arrives for Madeleine, Goncalo and all those 'destroyed' by the McCanns and their henchmen, I want to see Brenda's name cleared, public apologies for those vile troll headlines that drove the poor woman to her death.  The use of the word 'troll' has sinister undertones and it will be used unscrupulously by those intent on policing the internet and targeting dissenters.  In the case of Brenda it was used as a warning to others that spectacularly backfired.  

I think on this sad anniversary, it is important to remember the ghastly way in the full might of the establishment and the media were used to destroy the life of an ordinary woman who dared to question an obvious lie.  

RIP Brenda Leyland
  

___________________________________________

RIP BRENDA LEYAND (SWEEPYFACE)
originally posted 5th October 2014

So Sky's rolling news day on McCann trolls has resulted in the death of Brenda Leyland (Sweepyface) a middle aged lady angered by the lies of Gerry and Kate McCann. Seven years on, despite being suspects in the eyes of the rest of the world, in the UK they are still being treated like victims and being compensated financially.  No amount of money will satisfy Gerry and Kate, they have had over £4m, they also want the Laws to be changed so their crimes will never be reported.  We have had a news blackout in the UK for the past 7 years.  Why?

The McCanns didn't have any threats against them or their children.  Their witness claimed this in the Lisbon libel trial, but could not substantiate it.  Several months on, no-one has been arrested or charged for threatening the McCanns.  A bit like the abductor.

The biggest threat they could find to the McCanns was poor old Brenda, an obviously shy, timid lady who clearly presented no danger to the McCanns whatsoever.  But she was to be the scapegoat, the face of the cruel campaign against an innocent family.  She was the line of least resistance - had they doorstepped any of the more outspoken among us, we would have given them an interview they couldn't broadcast, on the hour, every hour, etc without Carter Ruck jumping down their throats - now re-employed by McCanns it seems and kerchinging nicely.  

Did Martin Brunt threaten her? If so, what with?  He had pretty much done the worst thing imaginable, but it clearly left her in great fear.  She fled from her village.  More doorstepping perhaps?  Her past raked up?  Did she have mental health issues?  Did any of her family?  Was she a vulnerable adult in any way? Surely Sky News would not have carried out such a catastrophic public attack without making a few basic checks?  

Were the McCanns going to go after her financially, as they have done with Goncalo Amaral, demand that she sell her house?  Was she facing threats of financial ruin? How could a regular person stand up to Carter Ruck? Her limited 'I thought I was entitled to' - portrayed her as ignorant, but what else did she say when she took the crew inside her house?

What did the police say to her?  Afaik, she was not arrested or cautioned, but did they give her a 'stern' taking to? And how stern was that talk?  Normal people with no criminal record or dealings with the police would be terrified. What Laws did Brenda break, if any?  Lets hope the police taped their interviews with her, if I were her family, I would demand they be revealed at the Inquest - and there should definitely be an Inquest.

However, Jim Gamble's hope of using 'outing' as a device to stop people asking questions about the McCanns, or indeed anything, has spectacularly backfired.  The consequences of such sinister threats have become all too apparent.  I would imagine legal talks are frantically underway as we speak, Sky News cannot just brush this off, they must at the very least, issue an apology to Brenda's family.  No Court in the world (maybe N.Korea or UK under McCann Rule) would have found Brenda guilty of anything.  If worse tweeters exist, then why didn't Sky go after them, why go after a fragile, quiet lady in a pretty village, who clearly posed no threat to the McCanns whatsoever.  The cynic in me pictures the McCanns looking up the property prices as one reason, but more likely the subliminal message was 'it could be you'.  There were threatening undertones in that news report, and more than a tinge of cruelty in the way the story was reported.  They couldn't hide their glee at exposing a respectable middle aged lady as a vicious internet troll to all her friends, family and neighbours. It was pitchforking at its very worst. 

However, any gleeful thoughts Gamble and McCanns may have of outing people on a regular basis must now be treated with the seriousness it deserves, as Brenda's tragic death has proved.  The punishment Brenda received (based on no evidence) was way beyond anything a Court could have dished out.  It seemed more like payback, than a genuine news story,  Her face, and home, was broadcast every hour, on the hour, as she was publically labelled as a 'Hater', continually hounding the family of Madeleine McCann.  She wasn't.  She was angry at this blatant miscarriage of justice as many are.  Nothing she did deserved the kind of punishment she received.  The death of a child is always emotive, especially when those charged to uphold the law appear to be covering it up. Sky News acted as Judge, Jury and Executioner.  Brenda is dead because of what she was accused of, not because of what she did.  She probably said a lot more in that Sky interview than 'I thought I was entitled to', but will we ever know?  They wanted to label her as evil, and they did.
  
Brenda, bless her, knowingly or unknowingly, may well set off a chain of events that will bring about the final downfall of the McCanns and their minions.   Jim Gamble and the McCanns wanted to use her as an example of what will happen to anyone criticising them, but her suicide has turned the tables.  Now they have to justify what they have done to her.  





HiDeHo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #1
  • Rank:Diamond Member
  • Score:2851
  • Posts:2851
  • From:USA
  • Register:26/01/2013 4:34 PM

Re:Cristobel Unbound

Date Posted:28/10/2016 12:58 AMCopy HTML

Tuesday, 25 October 2016

THE PAEDO LINKS AND THE HATRED

In response to 13:22 on 'Loony Website', I agree the Gasper statements are alarming, so too the evidence volunteered by the social worker Yvonne Martin, but they are not evidence that the tapas children were being abused. The PJ did not release ALL their files, many were held back, and there is a good chance those files contain the more err, sensitive investigations. Obviously investigations that were not pursued because they led nowhere.  

I think the evidence of Yvonne Martin (the social worker) is important because it describes the strange behaviour of Kate McCann and David Payne on the morning of 4th May.  And by strange behaviour, I mean the way Kate, Payne and the rest of the Tapas group closed ranks - that is they shunned the assistance of a British child protection expert on the ground when their need was greatest. With regard to Yvonne Martin's suspicions about David Payne, I tend to think these would have been checked out by both the police and social services.  

The Jon Corner pictures were odd, but then so too is Jon Corner. Like the rest of the McCann mob, he spotted a business opportunity that was too good miss. The wannabe film maker and artiste, probably thought his work on the Madeleine case, would hurtle him into the big league.  As for the make up pictures, little girls love dressing up! Friend of the family and artiste Jon, no doubt had his camera handy and played along with Madeleine's game.  

I doubt very much paedophilia has got anything to do with this case, despite the huge efforts of so many, including the 'authorities' to convince the public that it has. People like Jim Gamble who have tried desperately to link Madeleine's disappearance to online predators. Always a ridiculous concept btw, because at the age of 3, Madeleine didn't use social media.

As for the parents and their friends, I cannot stress enough that these people were 'into each other' not kids!  They spent as little time with their children as they could get away with. Small children have no filters! It is ludicrous to suggest that these kids were being sexually abused in the evening and then handed over to the care of others the following morning.  

Those examining photographs with a magnifying glass searching for hints of abuse have lost the plot! They have certainly put reason, common sense and logical thinking to one side in order to prove their point.  They are projecting figments of their own rather lurid imaginations.  The majority of us do not think as they do, we don't see sexuality in small children and we don't assume a man with a camera is a pervert.  

This case is bizarre, because both the Pro McCann supporters and way too many of the Anti McCanns are determined to push forward a 'lets hang all the paedophiles' agenda.  From the 'Pro' side, one of the first claims made by the parents was that their daughter was taken by a gang of paedophiles.  This was quickly latched onto by the press and various police agencies and charities, who coincidentally, also want to convince the public their children are in constant danger.   

The McCanns of course, have been looking for a villain to blame for Madeleine's disappearance from day 1, Jim Gamble is always looking for reasons to seize people's computers, and police agencies and charities are always looking for cash to combat the alleged hidden danger of all these paedophiles lurking in bedsits and cyber cafes. Apparently enough children go missing each year to fill an inner city school.  Who knew?  

Many of the Antis do actually hate the McCanns.  In the fullest sense of the word, along with all it's scary connotations.  Not only do they want them burned at the stake, they want them (and everyone like them) to be humiliated and scorned.  Not dissimilar to the feelings the McCanns and their supporters had for Brenda Leyland and still have for Goncalo Amaral.  I doubt there is anything more humiliating or degrading than to be accused of sexually abusing children, therefore it is an inevitable accusation when accompanied by intense hatred.  Chuck in these people hid the child's body and carried on with their holiday for 5 days, and the monstering is complete.

But I don't want to be too harsh, whilst the psychotic hatred is indeed psychotic, the hatred felt by many is understandable when compared to  public feeling for convicted child murderers.  Child murder arouses feelings of passion and anger in most of us, feelings that are beyond our control. Even as a committed pacifist and wuss, I know that I could not be in a room with Ian Huntley without wanting to physically attack him.  

Some who have followed and studied this case struggle to get beyond the 'evil' that went on that night, that is the reality of whatever it was that happened to the poor little girl that made her disappear.  For myself, it is an issue that I try not to think about too intensely, because I know that emotion can distort reasoning.  I want to understand this case from a rational, academic, perspective, with my own personal feelings set aside.  

I think what grated for many was the almost joyous way the parents behaved and indeed thrived, in the days and weeks following Madeleine's disappearance. Pleas for publicity and cash, rather than pleas for on the ground searchers.  None of it was 'natural', but pointing that out became taboo. Who knows how parents of a missing child should act was the argument put forward by the defenders.  The obvious answer was, well most of us would have pretty good idea and it would include personally digging up the surrounding area with our bare hands.  

There is much about Gerry and Kate that puts people's backs up.  Despite all the 'kids were perfectly safe' propaganda, most are still very uncomfortable with the McCanns form of child minding.  Gerry's 'it would have been worse if ALL 3 were taken', was shocking as it was being used to defend his parenting skills. If all 3 had been killed in a fire, there would be no defence!  Aggh, I'm going down a path I didn't want to.  Reasons to dislike K&G, there are too many to list, but none worthy of sharpening up the pitchforks.  

Quite obviously in this case, any hint from the police and authorities that Gerry and Kate were involved could set off a media frenzy and quite possibly, an ugly, public backlash from those who were taken in.  And the backlash would not only involve the families, it would affect every politician, police chief, celebrity and expert who gave their full support to the parents.  

There are many reasons I believe for allowing the case to hang in limbo. Time is probably the most effective way to allow an angry public to move on.  If and when the case is ever solved, it will probably be announced in the left hand column, page 6 of a local newspaper. As I have said many times, police the world over, accept that there are occasions when they have to playing the waiting game.  

The lack of a result in the McCann case is far from unusual, but the conspiraloons simply cannot accept this.  They have done their own investigations and found the parents guilty.  Their simple minds cannot understand why the police have not acted on the information they have supplied or thanked them publically for solving the case.  Bennett believes he should be wearing ermine by now whilst publishers are in a bidding war for his book 'Homos and Paedos Everywhere'.    

But of course, I'm not immune to the rather tacky, greedy character traits of the parents.  Gerry and Kate are probably the least likeable people I can think of.  As a grumpy old bird, I have zero tolerance for people who use their victim status to manipulate others.  The McCanns have made it their life's work, in fact, at one time, they were the MSM's first point of call victims for any tragedy. Who suffered the most from the lawless press?  'Me, me, me' shout Gerry and Kate.  

However, I think it is important for anyone interested in this case to look carefully at BOTH sides.  I don't mean the abduction story, which is clearly bollox, I mean from a human perspective and the way in which it affects the families involved.  We are not Judge and Jury, and we certainly shouldn't judge these people on the conspiraloon theories of Bennett, HideHo and Textusa.  Theories based on limited access to almost 10 year police files.  Kudos to the creativity, but in real investigations you can't just fill in the gaps with memories of News of the World headlines.  And sexing up the disappearance of a child goes beyond crass and into the area of abhorrent.  

Those who feel hatred to the intensity where they want their enemies boiled in oil, really do need to have a lie down with a mind improving book.  And I include myself in this when I think of Ian Huntley.  He couldn't control his madness, but I can control mine, that's what sets us apart.  In the case of Huntley, we know what happened (the bastard), but in the Madeleine case, we don't.  Those trying to spice the story up by saying the child's body was stored for 5 days while the group continued their holiday are in fact stirring up hatred.  For them the rocks already being thrown at the parents are not enough, there must be something darker and more murky than an accident.  

I think it is right that we should continue to challenge every lie put forward by to promote the fake abduction.  It is wrong on every level that innocent men are having their lives wrecked by accusations that they took Maddie.  And it's wrong on every level that the parents, and indeed, countless others, have profited from this child's disappearance, knowing that she was never in fact missing.

Neither the McCanns or anyone involved in the real conspiracy are getting away with anything.  They are already living with a Tell Tale Heart, and they must spend the rest of their lives as their alter ego, religious nut job, goody two shoes, middle class Stepford family they created for their media campaign.  Never to laugh, smile, or have a humdinger row for ever more, or gawd forbid, miss church on Sunday.  All of the aforementioned would give me the screaming abdabs!  

Meanwhile, hatred is a negative emotion that does far more harm to the hater than the hatee.  For one thing, the object of the hatred is usually blissfully unaware of the demonic thoughts going on in the hater's head.  Even if they knew, those with self esteem, would see the problem as the hater's, not theirs. I actually find it quite amusing, and indeed a tad flattering, that I have enemies out there pouring over my every word looking for something to be offended by.  I occasionally toss them a juicy bit of ribeye to keep to keep them going, lol. 

Hating strangers isn't rational and hating people for a crime we think they have committed is immoral and uncivilized.  Especially if those beliefs are based on the crazed rantings of a man who is quite clearly off his trolley*.  Inventing lurid scenarios to make the villains more villainish and the crime more heinous reveals more about the armchair detective than the crime they are 'researching'.  







*Yes, I know, lol, I need help!  I really do try my hardest not to hate anyone, but in Bennett's case, I keep losing the battle ;)

16 comments:

  1. Ros, You will always lose the battle not to hate Tony Bennett because, quite frankly, you are jealous of him. Sorry, but it sticks out a mile (and you are jealous of other successful Maddie researchers like PeterMac, HideHo and Richard Hall). Admit it, and you will be able to move on from your hate

    Reply
  2. I have the comfort and contentment of a clear conscience 15:59, and trust me, that's priceless.

    Can Bennett and the other hmm, 'researchers; say the same?

    Reply
  3. Rosalinda,

    The make-up aside (colour editing in my view, but your view is just as valid), I simply cannot believe that parents would give permission to publish ‘odd’ photos of a missing daughter, presumed alive and coming home one day. The same applies to Kate’s book, especially page 129. How to get back into society? Why would a parent place such unacceptably high and unjustified burdens on their daughter?

    For me, it’s not a sign of paedophilia, it’s a sign of knowledge. They know their daughter is dead.

    Regards,

    NL

    Reply
  4. I suspect when you are trying to sell a great big lie, normal rules do not apply NL. The McCanns learned very early on in their campaign that there is no such thing as bad publicity. Their libel actions and their outrage at online trolls have kept them on the front pages of the tabloids for years. 

    They were probably aware that the makeup pictures would be seen as odd, and in fact one of their stooges, Mark Williams-Thomas drew attention to the paedophile aspects of those particular photos, thus adding a few more headlines. 

    No genuinely grieving parents would ever have released such intimate details about their child and their lives. Gerry's happy clappy diary of their lives, was actually grotesque. He sounded more like a father who won the lottery than a father who had lost a child.

    Reply
  5. Look at what a group of Mccann haters have set up:

    https://www.gofundme.com/madelinemccann

    " I am raising funds to bring a private prosecution against the parents of Madeline McCann.

    I believe there are some serious questions that need to be answered under oath.

    Lets deliver the justice that Madeline McCann deserves.
    Help spread the word!"

    Reply
    Replies
    1. That ghoul just cannot keep his hooter out of things! How many ways do people have to say its none of your business before he gets the message! 

      I think he has reached that point where people won't sue him anymore because they have cottoned on that he gets his jollies from legal actions. The only way he can get a bit of Court action these days is to start a prosecution himself.

    2. What Ros - are you thinking it is bennett?????

    3. Have I got the wrong end of the stick? I haven't seen CMoMM, but assumed the 'group of haters' were them!

    4. An American? "Madeline".

    5. It's come from one of the horrendous Facebook hater groups. Someone called "Adam Cruz"

      Currently £850 of £1.5M goal - very strange that all but one of the donations are "Offline Donation"

  6. Anyone else having problems getting onto any of the Maddie forums? I can`t load Missing Madeleine Forum, nor Madeleine McCann Mystery Forum, nor Jill Havern`s site. Just get a dotted circle going round with 102503 above.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Yes, I am getting the same thing 20:40, how odd!

  7. Oh look - how to make your Gofundme look popular


    "What if someone gives me cash or a check? (Offline Donations)

    We've made sure that there is a way to add and track Offline Donations on your GoFundMe campaign so they can be included in your campaign's progress meter.

    Simply log in to your account, click 'Show Campaign Activity' to expand your dashboard, then click 'Add Offline Donation'.

    Remember, Offline Donations aren't charged any fees, and you won't be able to withdraw them later!"

    Reply
    Replies
    1. " £2,660 of £1.5M goal
      Raised by 16 people in 3 hours"

      Incredible that Adam Cruz has received cash/cheques from 16 people in 3 hours for a Gofundme that was only started today.

      He must be in a big pub with plenty of generous drunks.

  8. Even Forumotion's own website is down.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Message left on Forumotion`s Facebook page :
      "Hi,
      We are aware that our forums are not accessible right now. Our technicians are aware and are working to resolve the problem as quickly as possible."

HiDeHo Share to: Facebook Twitter MSN linkedin google yahoo #2
  • Rank:Diamond Member
  • Score:2851
  • Posts:2851
  • From:USA
  • Register:26/01/2013 4:34 PM

Re:Cristobel Unbound

Date Posted:28/10/2016 1:02 AMCopy HTML


Wednesday, 9 December 2015

FORSOOTH HIDEHO! - UPDATE SUNDAY 13/12/15

UPDATE SUNDAY 13/12/15

Bennett and Verdi's fiendish plans provide me with no end of merriment on a Sunday morning. 
 
Bennett is now producing evidence that I am a pro in disguise, no less, a sneaky double agent, confirmed by my failure to spit, swear and carry a pitchfork.  He is building a case by providing evidence of my kind words, no dastardly compassionate remark will remain unturned. 
 
The message is clear Mr. B.  In order to disbelieve the McCanns, you must hate and disrespect them, and if Mr. B finds any evidence of kindness or decency in any of your posts, past and present, you will be exposed and shamed.  Get it! You certainly won't be allowed in the inner circle.  For that you will need a white hood, rudimentary woodwork skills, a few 10 by 2's and a large box of matches. You may also have to supply a cup of your blood. 
 
'It's nothing but a random selection of words thrown together for effect' says Verdi.  Well deh!  It is an example of Mr. Bennett's copying and pasting skills at it's best, especially when he is going for a guilty without trial verdict.  It goes without saying, there is nothing he has selected that I am ashamed of. 

My assumed literary prowess is a dangerous weapon when in the WRONG hands proclaims Verdi.  Like giving a loaded weapon to a child.  I am not sure if he/she is cussing God for not giving him/her such a weapon, or cussing the likes of me for having it.  Either way, I'm kinda flattered and feeling a bit like Mozart to Bennett's Salieri. Now there's something to put your teeth in for Verdi!  ha ha 
 
In any event, I am putting out the wrong message!  It is not enough to disbelieve the McCanns, you must hate them with a passion and you must be prepared to pry into the lives of anyone vaguely connected to them without question.   
 
This case is not about the mysterious death of a child, the injustice of our Government interfering in a criminal investigation in Portugal, the evil pursuit of an ex detective, or the sinister way in which people with great power used the name of Madeleine to usher in new laws on Freedom of the Press, new powers to control the internet and a new bogeyman to frighten the plebs. 

The more discerning McCann sceptics are still beavering away on the shutters, Smithman, the last photo and butler in the pantry with the candlestick. They will only discuss the files.  I think we best leave them to it!








UPDATE 12/1215 

I see Tony Bennett has been beavering away to find evidence that proves, err, that I am not now nor have I ever been a 'hater' or a 'pitchforker'.  Why thank you Mr. Bennett, that is what I have been saying all along!  

He can't find any spite or nastiness from myself towards the parents, nor can he find libellous accusations of murder, paedophilia, swinging sex parties, cloning or gawd knows what else, because there aren't any!  (honesty and integrity)

I haven't stated categorically what happened on that night, because, err, how the feck would I know?  I wasn't there and I'm not a detective.  Back in the real world, I accept that I am no more than an onlooker and I find the idea of running a counter investigation to the police, ludicrous.  It is also creepy and sinister to pry into the lives of strangers online, but that doesn't stop them either.  They crossed the line from people concerned with justice for a small child, to a mob of vigilantes seeking victims to 'research' a long time ago.  

What exactly do these people hope to do with all their 'research'?  I doubt they will be called as expert witnesses for the prosecution - though the idea of Bennett being strapped to a trolley Hannibal Lector like and wheeled into a Courtroom is quite an amusing daydream.  

Realistically, all these theorists can get out of this case, will be a book (or several volumes) and a documentary (or several volumes).  The donations side never really took off.  There will undoubtedly be an unholy scramble to publish books once Amazon lift their embargo, there are many writers who have devoted a lot of time to this case, myself included, who may or may not write books of their own. It will be fiercely competitive, with those believing they have the divine right to the top spot because a)they have sacrificed the most and b)they have done the most 'work', thrashing about on the floor screaming 'its not fair'.  Some have started already as we can see from a quick glance at CMoMM (the cesspit), lol.   

I will make no bones about it.  I want to write to Kate's book. If she reads my blog, and I am pretty sure she does, she will get the message that I am trying to understand the reasons behind everything that has happened.  My interest in this case has nothing to do with hate. And again, thank you Mr. Bennett for confirming that.   
 
__________________________

Oh forsooth Lizzie HideHo, have you partaking in the fruit of the vine?  Your gushing tribute to Mr. Anthony Bennett fair soured me cornflakes!  

No one doubt's Mr. Bennett's Methodist work ethic.  He clearly 'works' from dawn to dusk, but tis the content of that 'work' that causes problems for myself and others.  He has not outed, exposed or shamed you (yet), but he will. You are female and blonde (a tool of the devil) and there is probably an entire filing cabinet devoted to you. Myself and Sonia have several, lol.  

The work of Mr. Bennett is to bring misery to others.  Where is the honour in that?  His actions in the early days of this case. when no-one knew what was going on, were abominable.  He was hounding and persecuting Kate and Gerry McCann in the same way, he has hounded and persecuted people all his adult life, take a look at his entry on Wiki.  The reasons for his involvement in this case are questionable to the say the least - he set up a 'Foundation' using the name of the missing child ffs! If 'GoFundMe' had been around at that time, he would have been minted. 

Mr. Bennett doesn't so much want Justice for Madeleine, as he wants fire, brimstone and himself as the worshipful head of a new loony justice league with a paypal button.  He, and others like him, use his 20,000 hits a day forum, to put the victims of their stalking on public trial.  That some of their victims are witnesses in a highly sensitive, ongoing police investigation, should outrage all of us.  It's just not cricket Lizzie, can you not see that?  

These witnesses are being investigated, put on trial, and pronounced guilty on a public forum where they have no right of reply.  That they have been able to maintain a dignified silence in the face of all those smears, is a tribute to their good characters, they have had much to contend with.    

Some antis, like yourself HideHo have become so entrenched in looking at the finer details of this case, that they have lost all sense of reason.  Restricting all discussion to the files and nothing else, will do that.  We have no right to select targets from this case and then to analyse their lives and their motives.  No moral right that is.  Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.  

The people that you, Bennett and the cesspit are scrutinising, are very real.  They are private individuals drawn into this case through no fault of their own. People who have done their public duty and co-operated with the police. They have never sought publicity and they have never sold their stories.  The message is loud and clear, they want to be left alone. They don't want to join in your games.  

As for Mr. Bennett's recent  Express victory.  I didn't see an apology so much as a correction, however, I will happily take that back if TB gets a thank you from Goncalo.  

I have much respect for your videos HideHo, but not very much for your judgement at the moment.  Sometimes in trying to do the right thing for everyone, you end up tied in knots.  Mr. Bennett's motives are not altruistic, they are sinister and malevolent.  Selecting victims from the net and putting them on public trial is evil in every language and on every continent Lizzie. That is why CMoMM is a cesspit HideHo, because it has deemed our public services and our democracy worthless, and set up a Court of its own.   

185 comments:

  1. HiDeHo hasn't been on the forum full-time until recently and I can only assume that she is unaware of all the nastiness there has been in the last two years.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Why then I wonder is she a Moderator? How to moderate when absent?
      I can't watch her videos due to the mostly, maudlin music. If I mute, then the occasional speech is missed.

      I'm admiring of her work as at least much stuff is catalogued. Oh how we wish we'd saved things from the early days.

  2. You are being too kind Lorna, HiDeHo has made a public statement fully endorsing the 'work' of Bennett and indeed paying tribute to it. Effectively, she is standing shoulder to shoulder with him, putting her name alongside his. Perhaps she should ask Terry Lubbock how that turned out for him. 

    If she has given that glowing reference without being up to date and without doing the research, then she is very naïve. The only thing we have of substance in this life is our good name, that is the legacy we will leave our children and our descendants. HideHo has officially declared herself a supporter of a man who may well face criminal charges when this case comes to an end. A big mistake imo.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton 25 November 2015 at 17:42

      I have no problem with HideHo"

    2. On 25th November at 17:42, I didn't have a problem with HideHo, lol.

    3. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton9 December 2015 at 20:51

      She has been standing shoulder to shoulder with bennett, putting her name next to his as a moderator on CMOMM for months now. But because she has written yet another load of rubbish - this time praising bennett - you have changed your mind and now call her naive because she has not done research.

      She has never done research - she just posts lies, misinformation and libel. I believe you have now witnessed it yourself.

    4. I tried the 22 reasons, as in my daughter is now an adult. But still miss her childhood and my role.

      I got to 11 then got bored. First was waiting.

      OMG the waiting. Outside ballet, Gym, swimming, and so on. Us parents seem to spend half our lives waiting. Engine running when cold, talking to the mum in the next car.

      No mention of Madeleine and her swimming certificate etc.

      I've said it before, Madeleine did not live at their home.

    5. Sorry, my post should have come after the Mail Online further down where the McCanns stated 22 reasons why they miss Madeleine.

      What a ridiculous ask anyway. Who could quantify their missing/dead child in 22 ways.
      If anyone asked me such a thing of my missing/dead child, I'd tell them to go take a hike.
      One would think that pair would have done so too.

    6. I agree SoJ, it sounds like an ill thought out essay question. 

      I tried to do the same as yourself and think about the things I miss about my kids when they were little. I can't think of a 'shopping list' per se, but I'm grinning from ear to ear as I think about the funny things they said and did.

  3. Yes, I see what you mean. 

    I feel that Tony still deserves praise for some of the things he has done but lately he has lost his way, in my opinion.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. No praise from me Lorna, and none from Goncalo Amaral by the look of it. Unfortunately, Tony's work 'the Madeleine Foundation' provided the harassment evidence the McCanns needed in their civil action against GA. 

      He has caused untold damage to this case, beginning with ALL doubters and sceptics being labelled as cranks, haters and pitchforkers. At the moment he is doing his utmost to derail any potential future trial. He doesn't consider the consequences of what he does - he has no moral or social boundaries and that has damaged the justice campaign throughout. 

      Apart from Bennett being found guilty of 'conduct unbecoming a solicitor', the father of Stuart Lubbock distanced himself from Bennett when he launched his book about his son's death. He also wound up the 'Trust' and stated Bennett would no longer be representing him. Bennett's Wiki entry is a CV filled with homophobia, islamophobia and hate crime, all his victims, including the McCanns, have my sympathy. They had no option but to take legal action against him, he was, effectively, sitting in a tree outside their home peering into their lives with a long lens camera. 

      Note, there are no tributes or thank yous from people he has 'helped' in the past, but there are plenty of regrets, recriminations and legal actions. 

  4. I agree with Lorna - I don`t believe Lizzie would have seen the treatment newbies to that forum have received, particularly from Attila the Hun. She would not have seen how nastily people were treated if they contradicted Mr. Bennett - and does she actually know why Candy and Freedom and 100s of other members left in disgust and how they have been hounded since? I don`t believe she does. But if she does, it`s a trait of that forum she wishes to keep detached from - she has never joined in with it. She just wants a platform to discuss her work. I really don`t think she knows the full story. There are still a handful of decent posters on there that remain impartial.
    Louisee

    Reply
  5. Brampton sucks and her investigation skills are partially dangerous and mostly facile. Head south and get to the lake woman, try Bronte on Sunday afternoon, you may find much better opportunities for lateral thinking and greater clarity of mind.

    "Julie likes dogging", that's what the odious creature Stillsloppingout (sic) said on that driving instructors' sick site. Here's a clue: I know who you are liar of age and fake actress.

    The truth's been staring them in the face for nigh on two years and still they can't see it.

    Fuvk 'em, evil naive vultures, and as for the blinkered martyr and prophet, Judas Bennett, he's lucky I've been too ill to deal with his childish pejorative and wholly untrue remarks.

    The Wigan Wum, OK whatever, I'm still 100% correct and YOU LOT, purleeese, busy Lizzie believes the cleaner was actually a cleaner. LOLTL.

    Does the sycophantic fool also believe Dave's bro is married to the non-English Donna Hill? Well PM the Sherlock of the net fell for it.

    Here's what they are: heartless busybodies with the investigation skills of inept fishwives.

    Any one of you is welcome to sue me at your leisure, including the fake media, lying Leicester and the clueless dingbats on the net, do your worst cap wringers and false idol worshippers.

    And Grime and the rapist pig farmer, YOU TWO chancers are also under investigation, and Andy Redwood I've not decided what to do with you yet, were you operating on behalf of the childern or investigating a lost oggy?

    Ditto goes for the rest of the death inducers, Gamble your card is marked, f**k with me again if you dare, simpleton.

    I will end you with my mind if you so much as think of one more stunt with psycho Swan, malleable Martin and our Kay.

    And Aquila (dumb-ass name, obviously), back off from torturing people who suffer from mental illness, Ros especially. Bluebag, don't make me teach you a legal lesson, and Verdi, please floss and use mouthwash - you sick loon.


    Finally, leave Kate Healy and her children alone, if you must blame someone, after all the buck stops at leadership level, blame two people in particular: evangelical Baggott and the most unappealing death stager and effete blade of grass, Foy.

    OK kiddywinks.


    From the heart, Julie Harrison, hugs and karma ...ALWAYS. XXX

    P.S. Mason, you are going to be the most divine intervention fun of all, you aren't now, and you never will be a match for an eight-year-old pathway building sagacious soul. 

    Euphemistically speaking, the High Priestess is laughing at your con artistry, deep flaws and juvenile coroner's court faux antics. Dickwad, take me on if you dare.

    Peace, love and joy to the family and the rest of the decent folks, and to the cowardice CROWD, watch your own space, snakes in the grass!

    Reply
  6. Could not agree more, Ros. I thought precisely the same - certainly no apology, and if that was some kind of vindication for Senhor Amaral, then I can hardly wait for Richard Desmond's 'Biographical Tribute to a Most Honoured Portuguese detective' (I won't state the complete title, I prefer understatement lol).

    Your phrase "the worshipful head of a new loony justice league with a paypal button" was absolute class, and so true! Brilliant, Ros, absolutely brilliant :)

    Reply
  7. He was hounding and persecuting Kate and Gerry McCann

    And isn't that what you've been doing this last few years Rosbell?I've said it before and I will say it again all you Anti's are as bad as each other.You all piss in the same pot.
    Day after day you come up with all the theories.Theories that are trapped in your warped little minds,even questioning the conclusions of SY regarding this case.What pathetic lives you all live.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. 14:10 Kate and Gerry McCann are not innocent bystanders dragged into this case through no fault of their own. They are the very public face of this scam, they have courted, schmoozed and paid the media to keep them on the front pages. They have lied to the public for 8 years, asking for help and cash. As they have put themselves in the public eye, they should expect to be challenged. My conscience is clear.

    2. Lol, 14:10. "Conclusions of SY"?!! What might they be, as we approach 5 full years of investigation? Please, do let us know! Hahaha

    3. Brilliant blog,in Ros we trust.

    4. To know it's "Day by Day" you must be following daily.
      As you're so disgusted, why don't you just tune out? Go and find something else to read.

      Something to be said for here, and some extent Jill's, is there is a right to reply. That unlike the coven of BB1 who are simply to scared to allow dissent.

  8. Scam? lol.Wonder what you would do in their situation and your child was missing.And please don't say you wouldn't have left your children alone in the first place because it was very easy for you to leave vulnerable clients locked in a room on holiday while you went out on the piss.eh

    Reply
    Replies
    1. 16:35, ah, same old lies from YGL, doesn't all that barrel scraping hurt your ears? 

      No, I would never have left the children on their own and I would never have turned my dead first born into a cash cow. I wouldn't have put out begging bowls (how tacky), I wouldn't have trade marked her name and opened a shop and I wouldn't have gone on TV begging for cash donations (again, how tacky). And that is just the beginning of what I wouldn't have done, do you want more?

    2. Madeleine was never left alone.
      No neglect = no abduction.

      Why do you think they always promote neglect?

  9. Apparently it's High Priestess, Mason??? LOL!! Still, never mind, karma's a bitch and not so GR8! So its not.

    The Riddler, (you have to laugh!). xxx

    Reply
  10. Ros, why on earth are you giving a platform to a woman who is clearly mentally ill and who litters her comments with threats?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Because I am intrigued and so are others 17:00. I'm all about giving people platforms not taking them away.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. You have your own blog Not Textusa, and I wouldn't dream of telling you how to run it, yet you think you can tell me how to run mine? 

      Julie is not being treated as a freakshow, how insulting btw, and no-one is laughing at her. Denying her a voice may tip her over the edge, I don't want to make that call. You are saying that if anything happens it would be my fault, that I am somehow preventing her from seeking professional help. Wtf? how do you make a leap like that? 

      And yes, I am intrigued. Julie is throwing in all sorts of snippets that link to various of aspects on this case - she may even be trying to tell us something. I just don't know, and neither do you. 

      I am not in a position to make the call on what Julie might do, why do you think you are? As I said before, if someone was making threats towards me I would want to know about it. 

      God forbid something did happen, how would I reply? Oh yeh, I knew about it, its in my spambox?

    4. Good for you Cristobell! You rock xx

    5. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton9 December 2015 at 20:34

      Have you reported the threats made on your blog to the Police?

    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    7. 21:38. No I haven't reported them to the police because they are generic rather than specific. I did in fact report threats I had received to Operation Grange a few months before Brenda was targeted, but I have yet to hear back from them. I doubt the police would be interested, and ultimately, it is one troubled woman recovering from a stroke and probably quite harmless. 

      To be honest, I have no idea how seriously to take these threats, if they are indeed threats. The 'taking down' Julie refers to, is imo metaphoric. I am guessing she has been a member of an inner circle, maybe the Madeleine Foundation, or maybe even with Team McCann and knows where the bodies are buried (metaphorically speaking). The MF is my current front runner, due to Bennett asking someone to take questions about Rothley Pillow to the members' lounge. Rothley Pillow is a female with a northern accent who has been having a mental breakdown on twitter for a number of years. She also knows Bennett very well. And Rothley Pillow knows the identities of all the original members of the MF, which is probably uncomfortable for those who are so camera shy. 

      RP however, doesn't like me and she has different fixations to Julie, so possibly not. Her fondness for Kate Healy puts her in the Team McCann camp and that opens up all sorts of other possibilities. Everyone closely connected with this case will be suffering all sorts of pangs and anxieties at the moment. The winding down of Operation Grange is not a good sign for those who are guilty. It would be quite understandable if one (or several) of them cracked. 

      The Team will divide, it is inevitable, probably back into their clans. Each family will want to protect their own. Julie is protective of Kate Healy, that much is clear.

    8. Meow NT, I am not pretending to be noble, Julie has an interesting story to tell (we think), and I and my readers want to hear it. And the majority of my readers are not mean spirited, we want to help Julie if we can. 

      The idea that I am endangering Julie's life is absurd, and a bit dramatic, Julie is reaching out, she has not shut herself off. I can tell you as a manic depressive that having something to live for, even if it is just getting your own back on some creep in a forum with a witty one liner, can save you from the brink. Too many people are isolated or worse, unable to communicate with those they share a bed with. 

      People who have reached the stage that Julie has, are crying out for attention. They are ranting because no-one is listening to them. You think I should say to Julie, no, I'm not listening to you either? And ffs don't go to Not Textusa, he nobly refuses to have anything to do with you. 

      Julie may indeed be having a game with us. Who knows? But if she is, so what? It makes no difference to our lives one way or the other. We can discuss this or we can discuss the shutters, the curtains, the last photo (yawn) for the next 8 years or we can toss in a curved ball now and then. This is a not a forum that locks a thread just as things start hotting up. As if!

    9. Should add, the posts were deleted by the author, not me.

    10. Cristobell - you are a top lady -

      - kind, generous and staunch...!

      Raising a glass of sherry to you -

      missbeetle

  11. bennett, bennett, bennett - yet again - how many times have you said you couldn't care less about him and his stuff bores you so much you don't read it?

    Where on Earth would you be without him?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. 18:50 Moan, moan, moan. If you don't like my blog, don't read it, simple.

    2. 18:50, history will remember Rosalinda, you on the other hand, nobody of value cares.

    3. I concur 18:50. Ross not only says she could not care less about Bennet but also nobody else cares about him and his opinions about this case. Yet she conversely states that his views are damaging the investigation, he his responsible for all antis being labelled vigilantes etc. etc. And before you tell me Ross not to "moan, moan, moan" and if I don't like your blog read it, I read it because when you're not assailing Bennet, they're good posts.

  12. Can you believe what T.B. has just posted? Talk about delusional. 
    I hope the authorities catch up with him sooner rather than later.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. I've joked about writing an Oscar speech, but I have never actually done it, lol.

  13. Sky News owes £17 million plus interest. Time they paid-up.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. They could ask the McCann's for a contribution!

  14. Well, still on the fence with the Julie stuff, i really am.

    The main reason why it might have a degree of integrity, is because as far as i know JATYK, have made no reference to it. Which is odd considering they monitor and repeat comments from here, then ridicule almost immediately. No mention, i dont think.

    Also the way TB dismissed it straight away and came out with some nonsense that she rang him up. End of according to him ( funny how he accuses others ringing him up also with absolutely zero proof). Also hes again rubbishing it.

    I dont know. It sounds rubbish but as said above then there could be some truth in it, due solely to reactions or no reactions. Interesting regardless. However i wish Julie spits it all out.

    Regards, Andrew.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. I'm with you Andrew, her style might be a bit ranty but some of what she says has the ring of truth about it.

  15. @ Cristobell 20 48. It's not only tacky but disgusting you did'nt hear of Denise Bulger Sara Payne Coral Jones or Kerry Needham doing anything like this,yet the McCanns have a house worth more than half a million and were begging for money to search for a missing daughter that they never searched for.Madeleine was'nt important when she went missing and she is less important now except as a cash cow,i have never heard of such a disgusting couple before the McCanns.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. They wouldn't have got this far had it not been for all the interference from other interested parties, such as government, the best lawyers etc. All the other families you've mentioned were only interested in finding out what happened to their children, unlike the McCann's who from the very start of all this planned to make as much money as possible out of their missing daughter. They must be the most shallow uncaring parent's to have ever walked gods earth. I'm sick to the back teeth of hearing people say "the poor parent's" they're not poor, and if they were let them sell their mansion and fund their own fake search! It's about time someone told them where to get off.

    2. I remember how the family pledged their homes to help with the search. Then doiiing, like the bell of awakening, Och noo, surely not? Yes!

      Think we'd rather not be involved.
      I wonder why?

  16. "suzysu Yesterday at 11:45 pm
    Not sure if this has been raised before so forgive me.... But I'd be happy to contribute to a Tony Bennett Go Fund Me. Personally I wouldn't care if it raised a few quid to take TB out for a meal with his chosen partner or if it raised a bit more as a sign of our appreciation. 

    Count me in, anyway!"

    And how many begging bowls have already been out for the poor pensioner bennett?

    Reply
  17. According to the fount of all knowledge, and people on that site much smarter and far more cunning than him, I am a CRANK.

    Well if the frou-frou one says so along with his whiskey obsessive buddies - then it must be true.

    If anybody ever made me feel sorry for Kate and Gerry, then it's him and the cesspit dwellers.

    Now I know why Joana, Teddy and Veniviedivici detached themselves from that from the beginning.

    He makes Jim Gamble look like Jesus on a good day.

    Reply
  18. Dear Kate and Gerry,

    If you ever feel like taking him back to court, I promise we'll have a whip-round.

    Lifelong whiskey hater.

    Reply
  19. A ridiculously contrived effort to try and paint Tony in a good light. 

    Whitewash the malicious, lying, nasty, bullying, pathetic little weasel that he is.

    Regards, Barry Sutton.

    All bow down to King Tony. 

    Reply
  20. "Sonia Poulton ‏@SoniaPoulton 17h17 hours ago

    #JournoRequest Did you make (& keep) unusual/extraordinary New Year resolutions in 2015? (newspaper feature) Pls email soniapoulton@sky.com"

    Job opportunity for you Ros.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. I think she is looking for something uplifting 10:35, not a tragedy, lol.

  21. Ros - re Anonymous 01.42 above who said 'Veniviedivici' detached himself from Bennett, you might want to know that Veniviedivici is the bloke who many years ago threatened to go to the McCanns and lob a Molotov cocktail at their house. So I don't think that on this occasion Bennett will worry too much that he 'detached' himself from him lol

    Reply
  22. 10:37. I have a feeling this all goes back to the 3 Arguidos and the original 'hard core' of McCann antis. People like Bennett, Butler, Jill Havern, Bonnie Braes, Rothley Pillow and the inner circle of the cesspit. They used to hold meetings at each others homes and in public halls under the Madeleine Foundation banner. They invited Goncalo Amaral to one, but wise old fox that he is, he didn't attend. 

    I have no idea if what you are saying about Veni is true, he is welcome to reply. I tend to think however, if it were true, the threat would have been produced in one or more of the civil trials against GA as evidence of harassment.

    Reply
  23. One thing it is worth pointing out about HiDeHo is that it was her ill-judged, two-footed immersion into the Wayback debacle that put an end to any realistic chance of getting to the bottom of that episode.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Intentionally one could say.

    2. Totally agree.

    3. Very true. Her intervention was naïve and impetuous.

  24. Hi Ros, Veni is Sean Hyland, here's a link https://ordinisrubricrucis.wordpress.com/tag/sean-hyland/
    In these two articles Hyland/Veni is described as 'vile' and had to make a public apology to the McCanns. If I think back to 3As days, I think it was Bennett who rapidly detached himself from Veni, who called himself Laffin Assassin in those days - not so funny today

    Reply
  25. Talking of old Madeleine Foundation days, does anyone remember that Inside Out programme about him where he was filmed wheeling a trolley load of leaflets around with him in Bristol, basically saying that Maddie wasn't abducted? The programme did an excellent hatchet job on him, making him look a prize old fool, and for ever after he was called 'The Trolley Man' or, more like 'Off his Trolley' Ha! Ha! 
    P.S. Found it! 
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i5UxCQunmk

    Reply
  26. I don't think Bonnybraes was ever in the MF. She started off bitching about the McCanns, and now bitches about Bennett, whom she calls the 'Head Hounder'. And now she bitches about you as well btw, Ros!

    Reply
  27. "Tony Bennett Today at 10:19 am
    It was always part of my thinking that IF I could get a favourable verdict from the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), then this would be made public - and NOT just tucked away in a corner like the Daily Express did with its apology."

    Once a liar - always a liar.

    It was NOT and apology - it was a correction.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Aquila says "Bennett is not only a gentleman but also a gentle man"
      Of course he is gentle with her as gets her to give him funds.
      That is how con men work,they gain your confidence, Aquila.

    2. Agreed a correction, not an apology 12:21 and (again) he backed down and compromised, courage of his convictions my arse. 

      So where is the thank you from Goncalo Amaral? Does GA appreciate what Anthony Bennett does for him? Did the harassment of the McCanns by the Madeleine Foundation help GA in the libel proceedings?

      It is significant that Goncalo Amaral has kept a 10ft barge pole between himself and Anthony Bennett, as I said before, he is a wise old fox. 

  28. Grrrr! Just clicked on to Mail Online to see picture of McCanns under headline banner. Thought for a split second, they'd been arrested. Been expecting it since 2007, so hope dashed again. Do something Operation Grange, even if it's misuse of the "Fund"

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Why would the McCsnns be arrested? They have broke no laws.Not even Portuguese Law.Sy ruled them out as suspects.There is no misuse of the funds.It's all there in black and white for any jo public to read.

    2. How do you know they have broken no laws?
      What is there in black and white? How the public donations to a Limited Company have been itemised? I can't find it, nor can anyone else. If you have it, please put it here for all to see.

      Goodness, you are clever. You also have knowledge of Portuguese Law as well.

      I wish I had a tenner for each time the police said, "We have no suspects" then the parents are arrested.

      Not sure why you're so furious as you must have tapped your reply from a phone, judging by all the errors. Why are you so furious? Why are they innocent of any wrong doing?

      I'm willing to listen to any reasoning that Madeleine was abducted, but no one ever puts up an opposing argument except that the parents stated so.

      Show me some evidence she was abducted, please.

      Sorry Ros for taking this off the original topic of yours, but this blind acceptance of abduction without evidence makes me annoyed, to say the least.

    3. No problem SoJ, I am sat here applauding. This blind acceptance of abduction without evidence is the most baffling aspect of this case!

    4. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton10 December 2015 at 16:55

      You mean you did not discuss the possibility of abduction when you went for a drink with bennett?

    5. Please @18.42, open that discussion as to abduction. Just start us off.

    6. @ SoJ10 December 2015 at 21:01

      I asked Ros a question about her meeting for a drink and conversation with bennett.

      I have no interest in "starting you off" thankyou.

    7. You asked Ros why she didn't discuss abduction. As this is a public forum as long as Ros allows it, I replied.
      I ask again. What is there to discuss about abduction? How would you start the conversation?

      "Hi Tony". "Can you offer any evidence as to how Madeleine was abducted?" "No, none."

      No wonder the date didn't go beyond one drink if they discussed abduction. Hahaha.

    8. @ SoJ10 December 2015 at 22:10

      As Ros has pointed out in the past - this is a blog and not a forum.

      Personally after reading you others posts on here I have no interest in starting a conversation or discussion with you - whoever you are

    9. 21:30. We did discuss abduction at that meeting. I hadn't at that time passed the 'beyond reasonable doubt' stage, and I was being very careful in what I posted. So much so, that I am accused of being a 'pro' in the early days, lol. The simple fact is, I would not have been able to live with myself if I were adding to the pain of a grieving family while there was still a chance they were telling the truth. My stance changed once I reached the point of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. 

      I expected Mr. Bennett to be 100% convinced. Not only was he publicly accusing the McCanns and involved in civil proceedings with them, but he had also taken direct action in the form of trying to get the twins put into care, leafleting their neighbours and running a Fund/Foundation in their daughter's name.

      I was shocked when he admitted that he still had doubts. How could he do the things that he was doing if he wasn't 100% certain of the parents' involvement? 

      I'm afraid this defined his character for me and any thoughts I may have had of helping him, were gone in an instant.

    10. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton11 December 2015 at 09:25

      thanks for the info.

  29. Lizzie Loopy Loo throws herself at the alter of the Worshipful Walter Mitty and we are all suppose to believe he alone altered the editorial of a major tabloid.
    Bennett's oscaresque speech hints at rapproachement and praises someone he tried crush a few weeks ago when mourning her father's death.
    Has the leopard changed it's spots or have the police picked up something in his affairs such as the Madeleiene Foundation scam?


    Reply
  30. Quote by Jill Havern.
    "What you won't find Tony doing is making malicious night time phone calls, writing hate filled blogs, or calling people 'kiddi diddlers' on social media, or sending threats of violence and even death, trolling other forums, or making satirical images of the McCanns including three year old Maddie who many of us believe to be dead."

    Not to my knowledge either has TB made satirical images. In her excitement however, falling over herself to sing his praises, she forgot the satirical Christmas Carol. Didn't he also pen a fictitious letter from the grave?


    Reply
    Replies
    1. So Andrew has been wrongly accused. Yes I do believe he has. Very sad and I am member of MMM.

    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    3. The 'letter from the grave' was far worse. IMO.

    4. It turns my stomach when he makes 'Maddy' into a ventriloquist.

    5. Sorry the Christmas Carol had to go, I felt it was polluting the place.

      Those poems and ditties etc, are born of pure spite. They have no purpose other than to cause pain, probably why the cesspit is filled with them. It doesn't matter how guilty anyone is, torturing just for the sake of it, is sick. On top of which there is no wit or talent there, it's just doggerel.

  31. @18.43.

    Yes i have been wrongly accused. Its a farce really. Still waiting for the Police to stick the cuffs on even though they have all my details but according to TB it will take 6 weeks to trace me or whatever nonsense he said. Spoke too soon, undercover police in my garden ready to pounce. 

    Pathetic and its a shame that the loon got me a ban from MMM. Even though hes not a member and tried to get that forum shut down and treated the forum ownee CF apallingly.

    Ridiculous.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
    Replies
    1. It's a crying shame that the MMM forum has rapidly gone downhill since your ban Andrew. Other good posters got the boot as well I gather. 
      MMM used to be the place to be. Although still better than the sock place. Lol.

      Good blogs, Ros. 

      P

    2. I don't agree that the MMM forum has gone downhill since Andrew was banned. He may be totally innocent of the claims made against him but his too frequent drunken rants were an embarrassment. 

      Nobody got the boot because of him - they chose to leave.

    3. Valerie, aka freedom. He was good fun though even if he did ramble on at times. I didn't say anyone got the boot because of him. Just that others got the boot or left on their own accord as you say around the same time. I'm a member there but not been on for a while. Whatever Andrew's faults were, the place was a lot better with him on board. Imo.

      P

    4. Andrew did my head in at MMM.

    5. I know he did freedom. Lol. Thursdays.

    6. Freedom/Valerie/Eileen only turned on Andrew after he declared his undying love for her!Before that she would flirt with him!
      Andrew for me is a hero in this saga along with Cristobell ,Blacksmith,
      Johanne(unterdenteppichgekehrt) etc
      His only concern is justice for Maddie with no other agenda.
      He will be vindicated in the end as he has all the aces,namely that the McC's are lying and Fleffer is a wrong un.
      imo

    7. I believe Candyfloss is Valerie and Eileen is Freedom.
      Must be frustrated as trigger happy mods who can't fire off a few bullets here.
      Maybe something will pop up on the MMM health thread that will be safe to discuss and not upset Tony.



  32. Please let us excuse Julie.
    She said she's had a stroke and that scrambles the brain. 
    Julie, if you're reading, get someone to oversee the posts for you. 
    Good on Ros for allowing her posts. God knows how she'd have been treated on Havern/ Bennett forum.

    Reply
  33. There is a topic about her there.

    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12221-the-riddler-or-the-wigan-wum-finally-outs-herself

    Reply
  34. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. "sharonl on Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:43 pm
      C.O.L.D. was formed in 2012 to help people unable to defend themselves against libel actions brought by the rich and powerful. We have decided to support Tony Bennett, who recently had to defend himself against contempt of court proceedings brought by Gerry and Kate McCann, the parents of Madeleine McCann."

      So in two and a half years it has paid bennett £2000.

      That is after an intial donation of £1000 reported on 16 June 2013!

      I wonder where the accounts are to be scrutinised?

    2. What a bizarre world this is that finances a man who makes a career out of persecuting people. 

      A simple scan of Anthony Bennett's Wiki entry reveals a long record of his modus operandi. It is littered with Funds, Trusts, Foundations and books wot he wrote. I wonder what Terry Lubbock thinks of Mr. Bennett now? 

      Those thinking of responding to these new requests for donations, should bear in mind that all the original translators and those reporting the true news stories to us from Portugal, did so for free. Joana Morais and Astro, who translated the entire police files for us, and Goncalo Amaral's book. Goncalo has never complained that his book is being read for free online. 

      People like Nigel Moore (McCann Files, Pamalam, Only in America, Blacksmith, Pat Browne, etc, And heck, me too, none of us have felt the need to set up an organised foundation or a trust with annual membership fees, as if? lol. Nor do we want the names, addresses and personal financial details of those kind enough to read us. 

      Foundations are usually set up for philanthropic reasons, to help deprived children, third world countries, science, education, etc. The Madeleine Foundation and this C.O.L.D. appeal, essentially helps one angry old man who some might describe a vexatious litigant. 

      He is there for the thrill of the ride, he doesn't really care if he wins or loses, because if he cared he wouldn't keep pursuing lost causes. He keeps doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. 

      Some might say, he has a very costly addiction. Realistically, it is cheaper to be a compulsive gambler than a vexatious litigant. I know this first hand, because as a legal secretary I saw clients who would literally not stop until they had lost every penny. And the noble legal profession did nothing to dissuade them. 

      What exactly were the annual fees for? Issuing Writs, taking private actions against the McCanns? Costs and expenses in organising meetings, hours spent on social media? Postage? Our Portuguese friends took on the gargantuan task of translating the police files. Cost? No charge. 

      Do those defending Mr. Bennett's actions seriously think he should have been allowed to carry on? He was handing out leaflets to the family's neighbours ffs. 

      Those thinking of donating to this new appeal, would do just as well handing the money to the sweaty guy at the roulette wheel. Or better still, to a homeless person or a refugee. 

    3. Thanks for pointing that out Verdi. Now deleted. :)

  35. "Mediated outcome
    6. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.

    7. The newspaper published the following correction in its Amplifications and Clarifications column:

    On the 29 April 2015 we published a headline on the front page which said “Maddy detective did lie about death cover up claim”. We would like to make it clear that there was no determination by the Portuguese court that Mr Amaral lied. In fact what the court decided was that Mr Amaral had breached the McCanns’ right to reputation and ordered him to pay damages to them.

    8. The complainant said these actions resolved the matter to his satisfaction.

    9. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code.

    Date complaint received: 05/05/2015
    Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 27/11/2015"

    damp squib not a resounding success for bennett.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. TB: 'Daily Express: "We LIED about Goncalo Amaral"' Eh what? Fabricating old coot, LaddyInBed picked him up on that one.

  36. No matter what cause he takes on in his life he always ends up a loser.

    Reply
  37. bennett seems very slow to post up the IPSO result.

    Reply
  38. Yes, saw that.

    Ros has been kind and I suggest to Julie that she gets a family member to look over her posts before publishing.
    Problem with strokes is what you think, isn't what you speak.

    I would advise though never to invite phone calls. Ros?
    Kind though it might be. Never offer up your phone no or email.

    Reply
  39. I wouldn't give a penny as me and others urged him to stop. He didn't even know the charge. He thought it was Libel. We tried to tell him but he was buoyed on by members who love some action. All he had to do was say sorry,(like BB1, Brenda and Ms Marbles)they only had to grovel.

    I mostly blame the forum for egging him on so let them contribute.

    Reply
  40. "So in two and a half years it has paid bennett £2000."

    I won't quibble with that. Bet all came from Aquila and that one who draws tulips on her computer.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. That would explain the fractious,poisonous bile that comes from Aquila and yet she gets away with it.She gives Havern and Bennett money.It all makes sense now.

    2. Money talks.

    3. Haha. I gave plenty of money to 3As, still got banned.

  41. No.. Im not having that. Tony Bennett a loser....

    The bloke is a handsome, successful millionare several times over.

    He is funny, charming and has an amazing personality. He doesnt lie or be malicious or basically talk out of his arse.

    He never wears socks ever and never picks on older women.

    He loves the Smiths and loves Murat.

    He would never do anything to muddy the waters. He certainly would never intentionally misinform. No chance would he say an old woman like Mrs Fenn would lie.

    No chance the last photo been tampered with. No photshopping anywhere .

    He would never try and get a break away forum shut down, that the majority of members he banned escaped too.

    Hes not a liar or a bullshitter.

    Hes Tony Bennett.

    A joke.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Get over yourself Andrew. You're clearly upset.

    2. 17:55.

      Upset no. Annoyed yes and im sure you would be as well if you had a pack of lies told about you. 

      Regards, Andrew

    3. Apolgies @ 17:55.

      I am actually very upset. Upset that Madeleine has been denied truth and justice. Upset that she cant rest in peace. Upset that her family have absolutely no respect for her. Upset that so many people used her name to make money and for their own sick agendas.

      So yes, that does upset me.

      Not the pathetic Tony Bennett nonsense.

      Regards, Andrew.

  42. Ok, so you read these blogs and stuff everywhere else. Bennett is clearly disliked and the majority cant stand the loon. And rightly so.

    However, his adress, number etc is plastered all over the internet.

    What i would genuinely like to know is why over the last 2 years he has singled me out. Amongst others of course, but why me. All because i saw through the fruitloop a long time back.

    It really is crazy. I wanted truth and justice for Madeleine and ended up with some weirdo on my case.

    Whats that about.... and i mean really?

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
  43. How do you know they have broken no laws?

    Because the Portuguese authorities said so 16;40 They couldn't even be done for child neglect because the children were being checked regularly.So not abandonment.

    What is there in black and white?
    How the public donations to a Limited Company have been 
    itemised? I can't find it.

    It's all there in Companies House.There is a fee to view any companies files.




    Reply
    Replies
    1. Hi 08:37. In my opinion, it is the 'neglect' that binds them all together. The 'collective' decision. 

      If the McCanns were to face charges of neglect, so too were the rest of the tapas group - they were all doing the same thing. As doctors they knew the enormity of child neglect charges and possible convictions. They would literally lose their livelihoods. 

      Why on earth would they risk everything by claiming they had neglected their small children, if they hadn't? 

      In order for all of them walk away scot free they had to convince the authorities (and the world) that their form of child minding fell within the bounds of reasonable parenting. And in their heads, it did. None of them were remorseful, none made excuses, and within hours of Maddie going missing, even the great and good were saying 'doesn't everyone do it'? 

      It was the kind of propaganda myth that Herr Goebbells would have been proud of. Ms. Kelly could barely contain herself from singing birds do it, bees do it.
      etc. 

      On the night Maddie went missing, the first message the McCanns and their Tapas friends wanted to get out there, was that they hadn't done anything wrong. So much so, that they were already painting a picture with Madeleine's notebook, of how responsible they were being with their checks on the kids. ALL of their careers were at risk on the neglect issue alone.

      I know there are a number of people out there who argue that there was no neglect. Just can't see it myself, I've yet to see one reason why the other doctors would risk their livelihoods by admitting to a crime of neglect they had not committed.

      As for the second message, 'Find Madeleine', they released a cute toddler picture that bore little resemblance to the almost 4 year old child who was missing.

    2. It's opinion of many that it should have been deemed neglect 10;40 but in the eyes of the Portuguese law it wasn't.How far could we take neglect if it had happened in the UK when you look back on the old Butlin's days where thousands of children were left in chalets while the parents drank the night away.A listening service isn't full proof.I am Pro McCann but have never condoned how any of them conducted themselves on that holiday.Do I believe the child had a genuine accident and they covered up.No I don't.I used to believe in the abduction theory but not now.My thoughts for a long time are that the child wondered out of that apartment.And either fell into the hands of evil or is laying somewhere never to be found again.

    3. So the leopard didn't change it's spots.The more mellow approach was simply a prelude to the new begging bowl request by sharonl.Anyone who contributes to this C.O.L.D. has to be a fool,especially Aquila.It is not as if they haven't been warned about him.

    4. When a river is poisoned at it's source the poison doesn't stay at the source it flows through to contaminate the whole river .
      Sharonl and others have contaminated themselves in the Bennett money making schemes otherwise known as scams.
      Seeing as Bennett is an avid reader of this blog he should release the figures from the Madeleine Foundation.
      If there is nothing wrong then he has nothing to worry about.

  44. " Tony Bennett Yesterday at 10:19 am

    Next week, all those in the media and newsprint publishing industry will be able to read that the Daily Express lied about Goncalo Amaral.

    I would certainly like to think that once they all see that, and discuss it over liquid lunches here and there, it will act as a restraining influence on anything that any of them might say about either Goncalo Amaral, or indeed the case as a whole, in the future."

    What a strange fantasy world that bennett lives in. He actually believes that this CORRECTION will have an effect on the press!

    Dream on bennett - dream on. Your insignificance is substantial.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. What planet does he live on? As if the press will fear the ramblings of an old man who has been a loser his entire life.

  45. Hi Ros, 
    Re. Julie Harrison, I noticed she mentioned Bury Art Museum. You may know that a person called Kate Holt apparently works there and is thought to be the author of the notorious dossier that led to Brenda Leyland's death. There was a thread about this on CMOMM: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11477-kate-holt-aka-cass-sidebottom. She is also on Twitter as @KDMoose. 'Julie' may be just Kate making mischief?
    By the way, feck the begrudgers Ros, I enjoy your blog, and Happy Christmas to you!

    Reply
    Replies
    1. It`s just the sort of thing she would do - she is indeed a twisted mischief maker judging by her amateurish films on youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsBXFf7xRXUGKlA6f70C6JA

  46. Ok - let's do a check on bennett's honesty and integrity that has been lauded on forums.

    The Portugal Resident has an article with this headline:

    "UK Daily Express publishes written apology over headline calling Maddie cop a liar"

    Now bennett - we all know that the Express published a correction and not an apology. So it the interests of honesty and integrity will you be writing to the Portugal Resident to have them correct their headline?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. You have to think - how did the Portugal Resident pick up on a story that was a few lines on page 21 (bennett screenshot on CMOMM).

      Well think no more. The story was reported by Natash Donn who happens to be a member of CMOMM under the name of harrylime - what a strange co-incidence that she, and she alone picked up on the story.

      Bit wait a minute - how many other stories have been fed to the Portuguese press over the years from CMOMM??

      What a thought eh - that the Portuguese press have been reporting on "facts" from CMOMM - go figure.

    2. Anonymous at 18.44. There is nobody registered on CMoMM with that user name.

    3. harrylime lime_harry or similar derivative was definitely a member of CMOMM in the past and is likely to be still in touch.

    4. There certainly used to be. How odd. Not.

    5. There was a lime_harry who never posted and hasn't logged in since 2012. How do you know that this was Natasha Donn?

    6. @ Caroline13 December 2015 at 22:29

      I have my sources.

      In addition - check how many press reports have quoted an anonymous ex police officer from the UK - no less than Peter Macleod of CMOMM fame.

      Follow the trail and a lot of misinformation leads back to CMOMM to Portuguese press.

      And oh yes - PM seems to have done a runner since amarals gofundme disappeared.

    7. How do you know it wasn't?

    8. Sadly, that's why the antis have always been thought of as cranks Caroline. The MSM have only had CMoMM to go on and the demands of Tony Bennett (take the kids away) were cruel. 

      I am not surprised Petermac has stepped back. Though I dislike his humour and his perspective on life, I have always thought he had honour. There is no honour in being associated with CMoMM, which I believe is the reason many of them fiercely cling onto their anonymity. They have much to be ashamed of.

  47. I am not Kate Holt and I can prove everything I've said.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Go on then. You have the floor......

    2. Not all courts are in Leicester, Gamble, Sky and co went too far last time. You are only brave because you are many, in reality you are cowards.

    3. Does Martin Brunt want a real life death on his conscience or not?

      The choice is his, and the floor is made of concrete.....

  48. ( YOUR WORDS )That is why CMoMM is a cesspit HideHo, because it has deemed our public services and our democracy worthless, and set up a Court of its own. 

    Our public services and democracy ( ? ) ARE worthless and SOMEBODY has to chip away at the foundations. I see it won't be YOU since you are obviously trying to soften up Kate McCann to share a 'bewk' deal with her. No chance! She has access to proper writers. 

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Ouch! So I'm not a proper writer :( Do you think my writing might improve if I styled myself like Jane Austin or Descartes? 

      As for the proper writers used thus far, did they truly tell Kate's story? Where are they on social media fighting the McCanns' side? I have never seen any evidence of them, anonymously or in their own names, apart from the dire warnings about internet trolls from Summers and Swan, that resulted in the death of Brenda Leyland (lest we forget). 

      Writers prepared to lie and sell out their own reputations are indeed purchasable, it all depends on the story you want to project. If you opt for fake again, then fake is what you will get. 

      I am at an age, when I realise more and more how important our legacy is. 'Nothing beside remains, round the decay'* Legacies are not the sole domain of Kings, Presidents and pompous writers, they belong to each and everyone of us who lives and breathes. More so now - we all have easy access to a 'Room of One's Own'. I urge everyone to get writing, ANY story can be told, as long as it is told with honesty and integrity. Prior to enlightenment, I probably would have sold me granny and thrown in a child. I jest of course, when I began writing my own memoir, I had a bit of an awakening. I realised that it was not necessary to hurt others, in fact it would have been churlish and unkind. 

      I began to see things from the perspective of those who had hurt me. I wanted to know what it was that made them act the way they did. I needed to understand the psychology behind the behaviour. People, like large blue whales, don't just lash out for the sake of it. 

      My parents I forgave long, long ago. They were young immigrants struggling to find work and a home for us in days prior to 'Cathy Come Home' - I picture my 18 year old mum with 2 babies and my honest, hardworking dad, and I want to reach out and hug them. 

      Writing a memoir gives you the opportunity to examine events from the past with a different perspective. 

      The anger and (most of) the hurt is gone, and quite often we can't even remember the incident or event that sparked off the lifelong vendettas. It is a tragedy that brings a lump to my throat. Parents, children, siblings, cousins, taking vows never to speak again and carrying them through to the bitter deathbed end. Even murderers don't get such cruel sentences. Are their lives much improved by banishing the reprobates from the family get togethers? Are they better people for not knowing or acknowledging members of their bloodline who don't know how to behave properly? (what is properly btw? lol) (continues)


    2. And before my enemies leap with joy at this early Christmas present, the above is generic, sadly, I know too many people estranged from their families. 

      But whilst I am in a quotes mood, Confucius sums it all up, 'when you set off on a journey of revenge, dig two graves'. Though revenge can be achieved, it only works if that revenge sits well with your conscience. Sometimes you have to stand up for yourself, and sometimes you have to defend your name.

      Writing a memoir can free you from your past. It also allows you to forgive yourself. You begin to see yourself as the immature, often naïve young person that you were. And, just as you would forgive your children, you forgive yourself. I once voted for Maggie Thatcher, I have to live with that (it ain't easy). I know people say, if I only knew then etc, myself included, everything would have been different. I know I wouldn't really have wanted that, because I wouldn't have had half as much fun! 

      I urge all those with 'write memoirs' on their bucket lists, to start now! Go out and buy a big old (pretty) journal (I have OC Luv of Stationery Disorder) and write something in it every day! 

      Write a letter to your grandchildren and your great children. In the future, people will want to know more and more about their own pasts, the roots they came from. I actually found an old picture of my Irish grandmother online, and I cannot tell you how amazing it was to find that. 


    3. We don't have to write bestsellers, we don't have to publish our words or reveal them to anyone. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having a secret private world that allows us to escape harsh reality once in a while. Writing fiction is a great way to take a walk on the wild side without actually taking drugs and being swept off a burning building by Superman. It also allows you to bodyslam your enemies without breaking so much as a fingernail. 

      When you see your problems written down, it has the same effect as saying them out loud to a highly trained counsellor. It allows us to get things back into perspective. In our minds, the problems run riot and wake us in the wee small hours because our bodies have gone into panic mode. 

      Writing exorcises those demons, it provides an outlet, a way in which to explain ourselves. The truth is not many people have got the time to listen, and who can blame them. I once made the error of asking the office doom monger how she was, she had me in tears begging Scotty to beam me up!

      We all have stories to tell and we all crave attention. We can't physically nail our children to the couch while we tell them the family history, who did what to who, and how it all started with Abel killing Caine (or was it the other way round?). That's how 'give Granny another drink' started, anything to shut her up, hic! 

      With memoirs, granny can tell the offspring all and everything she wants to, and they can read it at their leisure. Most families, if they are lucky, have a 'keeper of the family history', usually a female, a Matriarch, or a bride taking on a new family name. 

      In the past only Royalty and the Aristocracy had records of their ancestors. That amazing 'legacy' is now available to all of us. We can tell future generations what life was like in the 21st Century. We don't have to go outside and bury a time capsule(though we probably should), we can simply keep a journal for them. 

      But, best of all, we have a VOICE. The 'authorities' cannot ignore social media. For the first time in history, we have easy access to the 'Great and Good', they can no longer hide behind castle walls. Twitter is a leveller, no wonder 'proper' writers like Grace Dent refer to it as lawless. 

      Twitter. Facebook and other social media has changed the class system almost as dramatically as WWI. The word of a pleb is just as valid as the word of the elite Ms. Dent. 

      News is no longer confined to the borders of the UK, and many versions are available, not just those published by the BBC, Skynews and Fox. We no longer live in a Dickensian world where wars happen in lands too far away to make any difference to our lives. We are seeing the results of government policy directly on our doorstep. 

      Not only are 'not proper' journalists getting the true stories to us, they are risking their lives to do so. I wonder if a 'not proper' journalist would have dealt with the Brenda Leyland in a different way to Martin Brunt? 



      *Ozymandias, Percy Bysshe Shelley
      A Room of One's Own - Virginia Woolf

    4. In all that waffle I forgot to address your point about chipping away at our public services and democracy 17:52. 

      I don't want to chip away at them, I want to improve them! You suggest they should be brought down. Good heavens! What are you going to replace them with should you get the martial law you desire? 

      What we have is not the best in the world, but it could be? Due to public pressure, those in authority have to treat all of us with respect. They cannot put their fingers in their ears because of our race, class, ethnicity or sexual persuasion. We are all now valid. 

      The systems we have in place don't always work, that is why journalists and the interested public should keep the authorities on their toes. But setting out to destroy what already exists, is a little radical for me.

  49. "If she reads my blog, and I am pretty sure she does..."

    What makes you "pretty sure" that Kate reads you blog Ros?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Because it is human nature 19.00, reading about ourselves is irresistible, it is beyond our control.

      On top of which, Kate and Gerry have been at Defcon 4/5 since May 2007, they see danger everywhere (no way to live), and their tactics are seek and destroy.

      They have had to pre-empt every threat or perceived threat by crushing it in its infancy. However, it is an impossible goal, because they are now hugely outnumbered. They no longer have the public on their side, nor the funds to pay lawyers to watch social media 24/7. They desperately need a sensational headline to win back their support, and their enemies usually provide them. 

      Kate and Gerry cannot ignore what people are saying about them on the net - and the idea that they don't use social media is ludicrous. There are many pictures of Gerry sat at his laptop in their PDL villa 'searching' for Maddie. 

      I am in no doubt that Gerry and Kate read everything - in order to have control, you have to have information. It goes hand in hand. Who remembers the days before Operation Grange, when sightings of Madeleine made front page headlines. And who remembers how they always coincided with negative McCann stories? 

      Sadly, the way their lives are now, Gerry and Kate have no option but to remain shackled to the internet. They are trying to protect their children, by removing from the net that which might upset them. They might just as well take a broom and sweep the sand off their local beach. The only thing that can protect their children (or indeed, any children) is the TRUTH, warts and all.

    2. ..... 'sweep sand off their local beach.'

      A beach in Leicestershire? (5 ice creams and a pair of cheapo sunglasses in the pissing rain, no doubt).

      'Try to empty the Atlantic with a leaky bucket' is my analogy of choice.

    3. 02:01 'I loik that' as Father Dougal might say!

      It takes some kind of megalomania to believe that you can control what people discuss about you on the internet. And the lawyers egging them on should be ashamed of themselves. 

      It is indeed sad that the MCann children will read about their mum, dad and sister online, but that applies to any child and any parent. Princes William and Harry have had to read all sorts about Charles and Diana including allegations that their father was involved in their mother's death. So too the children of A-List actors, celebrities, politicians have seen their parents celebrated and torn to shreds. Now we all have access to social media, our children can read about us. 

      Gerry and Kate's demands that everything negative written about them should be removed from the internet comes straight from cuckoo land. If we all had the time, inclination and funds, we too could employ lawyers to watch social media 24/7 in the hope of finding someone saying something nasty about us. If you were that way inclined, suing people could be a lucrative form of living. 

      If it is possible to send shock waves up the kilt of the UK's ridiculous libel laws, then it is happening now. The antiquated scribblings of the bewigged legal eagles of the 19th Century have little relevance in this new age of instant information. Those who wield their right to be offended can and will spend the rest of their days in a Court room. 

  50. Through their wicked actions and disloyalty, (not Kate, Gerry, the family and co.) Rupert Murdoch will be less than happy, he will also never betray me. And that's a FACT.

    Old Mother Riley and his verdant friend don't stand a chance.

    J.H. xxx

    Reply
  51. Whatever or whoever Cristobell is, she is certainly not wearing any "disguises". She is the only "anti McCann" person that I bother to read. I personally don't agree that the McCanns had anything to do withe Madeleine's disappearance, but I respect the opinions of others. Cristobell's heart is in the right place. She is passionate about the life (or death) of this little girl, Madeleine McCann. The rest of the so called "antis" would never succeed in getting me to read their opinions ever again. They are malicious. So, whatever one may believe Cristobell is achieving, or not achieving; she is most certainly readable -even to someone like me, who doesn't agree with all her theories. We are adults, and should be able to debate this subject, without resorting to nastiness, which is something I've never seen Cristobell partake in.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Many thanks for your kind words 13:14, much appreciated. There is very rarely any need for bad manners and name calling*, they are usually the last resort of those with limited communication skills. 

      I welcome debate, especially with those who have issues with me - if they could keep a civil tongue, I am happy to answer any question. It is the reason I loved forums, I like to interact with others and hear different views and opinions. I have learned much over the years, not least, that censorship brings me out in hives. And that censorship is the result of the majority of members' fear of newbies and, gawd forbid, ideas that might make them think outside the box, keeps them way too tame for my liking. 

      I am not ashamed, actually, I am proud to say, that I have often been persuaded by better arguments than my own. For me, very few things are set in stone. We are a rapidly evolving society, especially over the last two decades, where we have taken a giant leap. It is no longer about being born in a castle with a crown on your head, it's about the number of likes and followers you have on Facebook and Twitter. Everything is up for grabs, no silver spoons required. 

      But I digress, I don't have any NEED to prove that I am right on anything, in fact my days are much improved when I learn something new and enlightening. In the early days, I actively looked out for signs to support the McCanns' abduction claims. For me it was a battle of conscience, I did not want to think what I was thinking! I'm afraid thus far, nothing has persuaded me to the contrary on the abduction story. 


      *or people not in a position to deck the creep that just insulted their mother.

  52. Ros said, "Why on earth would they risk everything by claiming they had neglected their small children, if they hadn't? "
    Oh Ros, wish I had such pure thoughts as you. 

    Anyway, I see that Mr Bennet has made three more FoI requests. The powers to be must bang their heads on the desks when they receive them.

    Anyone here old enough to remember the BBC programme, "Ever Decreasing Circles."? How Martin's poor wife suffered.

    Roll on the Amaral verdict, then I no longer need to view CMoMM.

    Reply
  53. 14 December 2015 at 09:33
    Astute comment my dear.

    Reply
  54. So Mr Bennett has made three more FOI requests and you're in full mock mode. Isn't he just working within the law as it currently stands so that we may all understand the workings of this so called democracy better? After all................'' Due to public pressure, those in authority have to treat all of us with respect. They cannot put their fingers in their ears ........'' ( your words ) So let's see how that pans out shall we?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. FOI requests are fine when used with common sense. Unfortunately, they are open to abuse by professional stalkers and busy bodies, who take our laws quite literally. For people like Mr. Bennett, his civil rights take priority over any effects his actions may have on a criminal investigation or possible trial.

      Unfortunately, you cannot force people to apply common sense or behave decently. Mr. Bennett knows his rights and will use them at every opportunity.

  55. Three more? He has made hundreds of requests and as a tax payer I object to him wasting my money. Being a bored pensioner is no excuse.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Bearing in mind the BILLIONS wasted by successive governments I think you're being somewhat churlish to single out Mr Bennett as a wastrel. You might ask yourself what the FOI Act is really in place for. Do you truly believe it's for YOUR protection? As for CH's remark that................'' , who take our laws quite literally. For people like Mr. Bennett, his civil rights take priority ..............''Well lawyers DO take the law literally . Justice certainly has nothing to do with it and therein lies the problem. As for personal Civil Rights , they should always take priority or else what's the point? As we have seen with the Human Rights Act, one person's human right will always conflict with another's.

  56. Yes, Bennett has made FOUR Freedom of Information requests of late. He did this one about the Balkwell case a few days ago: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_cost_of_investigating_the_de#incoming-744742

    Reply
  57. And you think he is WRONG?

    In 2012, an Independent Police Complaints Commission report found eight senior officers made 25 errors in a "seriously flawed" investigation ( into the death of Lee Balkwell) It found no evidence of corruption......................in the slightly mangled words of Mandy Rice - Davies ( now sadly deceased ) ...'' well they wouldn't would they?......... ''

    Reply
  58. I recall that about a year ago, one of the reasons Sonia gave for the delay in releasing the documentary was because she was waiting for the answer to a Freedom of Information request. Waa that one of Bennett's perhaps?, cos he's asked quite a few about Madeleine. Did Sonia ever get an answer to that FoI Act request, do you know Ros? And while you're about it, what is the latest news on Sonia's doc. If she doesn't release it soon, Bennett will be proved right. He said it would never happen!

    Reply
  59. It looks like Bennett has gone manic, asking Freedom of Information Acts of everyone in sight! I found this one on the What Do They Know site which he uses a lot: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/policy_on_the_scientific_evidenc#incoming-740270 He claims school kids are being indoctrinated into believing evolution and has demanded to know why they don't get told the scientific evidence against evolution. Can't wait for the answer! According to the site, Bennett has made 24 FoI act requests in the past 6 years

    Reply
  60. Can I just say cheers to John Blacksmith two excellent blogs. Please keep them coming.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Yes good to see Blacksmith posting, he has been one of the few sane voices over the years.

    2. Blacksmith who has vowed never to post again about the McCanns at least ten times a year. What a role model.

  61. I think a new 'Maddie forum' needs to originate. Bennett ruined CMOMM when he turned to the 'dark side'. He's also ruined the MMM forum as well which has also gone down the toilet.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. Well there you go, there's a job for you, go and set up a Maddie forum. Since when did Tony turn to the Dark Side? There is nothing wrong with the MMM forum, IMO, there just is no case news at the moment.

    2. @00:44
      I agree all forums are quiet right now.

  62. All forums go quiet from time to time, no need to blame anyone for that.

    Reply
  63. Tony Bennett has 'ruined' MMM? I hardly think so. They've ruined themselves. it's a group of about 35 people who just talk to each other and not to the world outside, 90% of their posts are only visible to members. Whatever people say about CMOMM, it remains the 'go to' forum for news and discussion about Maddie, as it has been for years

    Reply
  64. Its just quiet everywhere. The calm before the storm im predicting. 

    CMoMM has been on a downward spiral for 2 years due to all the bannings of anyone who had a decent opinion.

    MMM hasnt gone down the toilet but sadly its not the same place since TB issued his threats and scare tactics to the amazing forum owner.

    Wishing you all a merry xmas. 2016 will be the year.

    Regards, Andrew.

    Reply
  65. @10:04 above.

    ....It's not somewhere you can goto for reasonable debate and discuss varying theories though is it. You know, what a forum is supposed to be about. "Dont mention Smithman" and all that nonsense.

    At least there are 'adults' on MMM who can discuss things without the pack of socks/dogs all over them. 

    Plus its a friendly and enjoyable place. Quality over quantity every time.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
  66. The latest desperate guff and a new Smithman thread. Its patheticly embarrassing. Cringeworthy too. Its as clear as day what hes trying to do, and failing miserably. Ok Tony, we get it. You have to protect the Mcs that the Smiths are liars. Fair enough, you been put in that position because your stupid, to put it blunt. Dont try and convince everyone with your rubbish. Funny thing is apart from your smelly socks, the world thinks your a pratt. Rightly so. You tell lies.... by the way, have i been cautioned yet... No, i dont think so and you know it. Nonsense and pathetic. Like your sad life if everyone is being honest. Your an idiot and.a fake but have a good xmas.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
  67. "Smithman quiz", have you ever heard anything so ridiculous. Talk about scraping the barrell. Blimey.

    Poor sod. Hands are tied clearly.

    Really is pathetic and sad to see.

    Fight for Madeleine Tony. Not what your told to say. While your at it, stop making up shit about me you old goat. 

    Regards, Andrew.

    Reply
    Replies
    1. I agree Andrew, the new Smithman quiz is embarrassingly crass.

      While the rest of us sing tidings of comfort and joy and peace and goodwill to all, Bennett has been working on who he can upset. His need to hurt others seems to go into overdrive at this time of year, as his ghastly Christmas Carol demonstrated. 

      Now a quiz. Sheesh. The Smith family, the unfortunate witnesses to something of significance on the night Madeleine vanished, are once again being called liars, but he has done in a fun way, to capture the spirit of the season. 

      What strange creatures inhabit the cesspit. The most popular thread graphically discusses the last moments of Madeleine 'cowering'. Begun by Wordsmith and potential Mrs Donald Trump, Hobs, it focuses on the tragedy of the little girl and it is designed to bring maximum pain to those who loved her. Especially curious pre teens. 

      It achieves nothing and it proves nothing. Toddlers always run off and toddlers love to 'play out'. I remember carrying each of my own toddlers home, under my arm kicking, screaming and demanding the right to play out for longer. My first born used to call me a 'fat, fat fat' because he didn't have the vocabulary to put an expletive noun at the end - he does now, lol. 

      I have to question the motives of these people who see sexual connotations in pictures of kids eating ice cream (ffs). And people who sit with a magnifying glass studying someone else's holiday pics looking for signs of misery. 

      What do they hope to achieve? Their research merely establishes that they are a bunch of cranks and weirdos looking for reasons to be spiteful. It doesn't challenge the cover up or the shocking intervention of the UK authorities. 

      What CMoMM fail to understand is that most people are not mean spirited. They don't want to kick a family when they are down and they find the idea of researching other people's private lives abhorrent. 

      They have been locked in their stinking dungeon for so long that they have lost all sense of reason and logic. Their only remaining link to reality is their desperate need to remain anonymous. Their research and their discussion is ghoulish and in extremely poor taste. They know they have much to be ashamed of.

  68. You're completely missing the point of the 'cowering' post. Why would Kate use the word, 'cowering'? By using it she reveals that Madeleine had cause to be crouching IN FEAR. At that point in the evening it would have been entirely reasonable to think that Madeleine had wandered or maybe was mischievously hiding in a yet undiscovered place. But no, Kate immediately brings fear into it so it's perfectly reasonable to discuss this slip of the tongue as far as I'm concerned. 
    To say that CM0MM doesn't challenge the intervention of the UK authorities is absolute nonsense and you know it. Don't you think that Mr Bennett's FOI requests go some way to addressing this?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. @ Anonymous18 December 2015 at 13:39 who said "To say that CM0MM doesn't challenge the intervention of the UK authorities is absolute nonsense and you know it. Don't you think that Mr Bennett's FOI requests go some way to addressing this?"
      ---------------------------------------------- 
      From an earlier one of many bennett's FOI requests

      "DECISION

      Section 14 (1) - Vexatious or repeated requests

      Pursuant to the provisions of Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information
      Act 2000 (the Act) I have decided to refuse your request as it has been
      deemed as a vexatious request.

      Under Section 14(1) of the Act, a public authority does not have to comply
      with vexatious requests. There is no requirement for a public interest
      test.

      You have made multiple requests for information relating to the Operation
      Grange investigation. You have also engaged in voluminous correspondence
      with the Operation Grange team all regarding this single investigation.

      You have been warned previously about the vexatious nature of these
      requests.

      The Act was designed to give individuals a greater right of access to
      official information with the intention of making public bodies more
      transparent and accountable.

      Whilst most people exercise this right responsibly, a few may misuse or
      abuse the Act by submitting requests which are intended to be annoying or
      disruptive or which have a disproportionate impact on a public authority.

      The Information Commissioner recognises that dealing with unreasonable
      requests can place a strain on resources and get in the way of delivering
      mainstream services or answering legitimate requests. Furthermore, these
      requests can also damage the reputation of the legislation itself."

  69. When it comes to the safety of our citizens, Bennet should keep his nose out and leave it to our security forces without his asinine questions causing even more paperwork. Or does he think he can solve the terrorist problem as well as Madeleine's disappearance?

    As for "Cowering"? It didn't take some yank called hobs to point that out to any of us who've been around since the beginning, but the faithful are being called upon to keep the forum dying from lack of interest.

    Reply
  70. It's news to me that Hobs is American.

    Reply
  71. @ Anonymous18 December 2015 at 13:39

    Perhaps you could remind us of what exactly bennett has achieved in progressing the case of missing Madeleine through his FOI requests? That is apart from using up time and money to answer his stupid questions.

    Reply
  72. You have surmised from that one word (cowering) that Madeleine had cause to be crouching in fear, implying that she was afraid of her mother. Your theory is pure speculation and it is unkind. What are you trying to prove and what are you trying to achieve? 

    As for Mr. Bennett's FOI requests, again, what is he trying to achieve?

    Reply
    Replies
    1. No , I'M NOT implying that Madeleine had cause to be afraid. HER mother is by using the word 'cowering' ( look up the definition since you seem confused ) instead of the less emotive one, 'hiding.'

  73. Mr Bennett (can i doff my cap), is only doing the FOI rubbish, to report, or try to, to his paymasters in whats going on. They cant obviously do it. But pay a loon or deduct massive court cases.... TB is your man. Bung him a few extra to dismiss the Smiths at all costs and job nearly there. Except its not. Far from it. Hows the Smith quiz... Have you ever seen anything so sad and pathetic.

    Poor troubled soul.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
  74. There's now a Madeleine quiz as well. 

    http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12258-the-grand-madeleine-mccann-christmas-quiz-2015#329318

    Reply
    Replies
    1. His polls were always a joke so he's started on the quiz's now. It's all a sick game to him. How tragic.

      I hope Santa brings him the right medication he so desperately needs.

      Regards, Andrew

    2. I think it is all part of the' McCann game plan' Andrew. Game set and match.

    3. Oh, absolutely part of the McGame.

      They won't win though.

      Truth and justice will catch them out soon. All of them. 

      Regards, Andrew

    4. You know what Andrew, I think you have been right all along re-TB. A Smithman Quiz, dead give away. 

  75. Another thing which is equally pathetic and sad, is the fact that Tony talks to himself, through the verdi/willis socks. See Sonia thread. He actually thinks he's amusing. Deluded of course. But everyone knows that.

    Regards, Andrew

    Reply
web analytics
Copyright © 2000- Aimoo Free Forum All rights reserved.