Sunday, 7 September 2014

DID TB GIVE JUDGE LIST OF ANTI'S?

I left CMoMM because I objected, on moral grounds, to Tony Bennett's harassment of the witnesses in this case and I was soon to discover many others left for similar reasons or were simply whooshed for voicing an alternate opinion.  My exit however was slightly more dramatic as I had the means to reply. 

I have allowed this subject to continue on my blog, as it has proved to be very enlightening indeed, and much as I would like to drop the matter and move on, I am driven to discover what exactly Tony has been up to, and on who's behalf?  I am hoping the anonymity of this blog will encourage more to come forward with what they know.  Where did it all begin, at the Mirror forum, the 3 Arguidos?

Does anyone remember Tony handing over a list of anti names at his trial in London.  It was hot gossip on the cesspit pro forums, but not picked up on CMoMM, most of us at that time were too pre-occupied in sympathising with the injustice heaped on TB by Carter Ruck and the McCanns to question the minutiae of the Judgement, and in any event, we had Tony to deconstruct it for us. 

Was there a list?  I don't care about my name being on it, I would have failed in my campaigns against injustice if it weren't, but others do care, and guard their privacy with passion.  Quite right too, The queues for the gallows would be unmanageable if the entire population declared themselves Spartacus.  The martyr route takes a certain kind of dedication and madness.  We are few, and mostly bonkers.  As a catholic child I determined to die burning at the stake like my heroine Joan of Arc for a great and noble cause, only I wasn't quite sure what it would be - I was rapidly going off religion.  But I digress, the simple explanation is that most people are too busy living their lives and enjoying their families to become the target of crackpots.  Those of us who put our names, know what to expect.

The word 'list' for me comes in the same sinister category as the word 'ban' - that is, words I despise. I've always found it somewhat absurd that one adult can believe they have the power to 'ban' another adult from doing as they wish.  The word 'list' is reminiscent of good old Joe McCarthy and the Hollywood witch hunts, 'give us the names of your mates, and we'll let you off'.  The honourable ones chose prison and ruination, indeed one said, he could give them a list [of his friends] but he wouldn't be able to face himself in the morning.  Quite. 

Tony now sees himself as Emile Zola, and we are his accusers, kudos to him for the dramatic twist, but the questions remain unanswered and I want to know more about the 'List' and the agreement of Carter Ruck to write off nearly £300k in legal fees.  Tony pointed out during his legal battles with the McCanns that he was far from alone in not believing the abduction story. which is fair enough - why should he alone be punished, he wasn't the only one - its the standard reply of the tell tale kids in the playground. But why volunteer the information that he knew the 'real' names of many others?  That's simply not cricket. 

I don't want a war against Tony, and I won't publish aggressive or juvenile posts.  However, I think there is a lot he is not telling us, and indeed, I feel we have been misled.  This isn't personal, I have always thought of Tony as a passionate, if somewhat eccentric, campaigner for justice - though I have to confess I have not studied his work in any great detail as I fundamentally disagree with almost everything he says.  That's not to say I disliked him, he is an interesting character, but his behaviour may not have been as harmless as I thought, and I want to know the truth. 

62 comments:

  1. Great blog, Cristobell, I had a smile at the mention of Joan of Arc.

    I'd be very interested to see the 17 page document that was handed over on the first day of the trial.

    Is this the second time people have been "outed", who was behind the outing of the original 3A members?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You say you don't want a war against Tony and yet you precede the statement with a full blown attack, Joan of Arc, mounted on your chariot of fire donned in glistening helmet brandishing a sword of steel, or was that Boadicea?

    By refusing to publish comments (for whatever reason) you are doing exactly the same thing as you are accusing others of doing, silencing the voice of people you don't want to be heard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To be fair, Tony started the French theme with Emile Zola :)

      Tony has the ability and the means to reply to anything posed to him here or elsewhere - something that has always been denied to his critics. Did Tony give the 'real' names of those posting on Jill's forum to the Judge or the other side, and if he did, why?

      I'm not publishing abuse. If you can find a forum or blog that does - post there.

      Delete
  3. I see some CMOMM members must refrain from expressing their points of view on Tony's birthday.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes the 'Comment Left on Cristobell's Thread' thread has been whooshed as TB doesn't think it warrants further discussion. Members have even been helpfully instructed what to think about each section of the original comment, yes all neatly laid out in blue. Nothing like a nice bit of fascism on your birthday eh?

      Delete
  4. Christobell - it started on 3a - Tone was a late comer to the case - I never saw the stirrer on the Mirror

    3a was a curate's egg at the height of it's popularity - 7000 regular contributors - probably the same number of lurkers. Pages flipping in a matter of minutes.

    Lots of bollocks was featured: 'Coldwater' anybody? But there were plenty
    of sober mods to keep the circus in check.

    And then Tone the Comb pitched up (just at the same time as 'Amaral' was posting missives on 3a - he never did of course)

    Tone soon inveigled himself with admin.

    'Beowulf' of Toronto - ran the technical aspects of 3a - my reading is that he got properly fed up with Tone's landgrab and with 3a admin fawning over the failed solicitor/author/social worker- and he pulled the plug.

    Anyway that's ancient history - suffice to say Bennett is a vampire - who needs an invite to cross the threshold - any forum is advised to proceed with caution - he will devour you from within. He has a habit of finding enough enablers to help him in his cause.

    Carry on Christobell - I am only vaguely familiar with your take on the case - but I too would deplore being put on 'lists' and being put in 'coolers'.

    That way fascism lies.

    And we've come too far from 1939-1945 to let that happen again.

    haven't we?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rosalina i,m not a member of CMoMM but i visit it from time to time and there are a lot of strong minded and intelligent people who post on it so i suppose inevitability there will be people who disagree to the extent where some need tomove on. I coukd see the fustration in you over the smith issue and you were right to make the decision to move on. I notice to that one of the posters who i also really enjoyed reading their posts (Russian Doll) nolonger appears to post can you tell me what happened there.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi ya, delighted to tell you that Russian Doll is now posting on the new Candyfloss forum http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/ - you will find lots of familiar and friendly names there :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I thought you were going to continue discussions about bennett on the new candyfloss forum?

    ReplyDelete
  8. You met bennett, you were in email contact with him, why don't you ask him directly and report back here rather than fuelling speculation?

    ReplyDelete
  9. There was most definitely a list of names Ros. TB addressed it but wriggled out in his usual fashion. Amazing how so many are devotees yet maybe five were in court.
    I don't remember you prior to JH forum, did you use your real name?

    I was in from the word go, but I don't remember TB on the Mirror. 3A's always burbling away but the distribution of leaflets was when he hit the fan. I've never been a prolific poster and no one these days would remember any of my user names so not the best witness.
    I recall the leaflet business vaguely and even Brenda Ryan, owner of 3A's was against it. He in his usual pig headed way went ahead. I believe had he not done so, he would not have ended up in court. I seem to remember he had wheedled his way into admin by then and there was a third member, Steevo maybe?

    Next time I noticed him, was correcting those on MM on their grammar. Not liking his bullying ways, I reminded him to dry clean his suit and get some grooming. Meanwhile he was being a nuisance on Anorak and banned from an Australian forum whilst also posting as "bird" on David Icke.
    Phew! Why Jill gave him a home I'll never know.
    He was totally obnoxious until the lead up to the court case. Then he became "poor me" and so contrite. He has of course reverted back to his old self recently.
    That's as I know him, the secret meetings I wasn't nor would wished to be part of. Mr Amaral there or not.

    You need to ask specific questions Ros to jog my/other's memory. In the grand scheme of things he is so unimportant as just a poster although he wouldn't agree.

    Ah yes the meeting with solicitors and missing cheques, oh and the partnership with Steevo? It will come back Ros, long lost memories.

    Would love to know, and I have asked him with no reply, why he went to court but his female co-hort didn't?( Co-hort is telling me it's wrong) you all know what I mean, his "partner". The partner who claimed he had many mistresses, excuse me while I laugh my socks off.
    You could write a book Ros on the many facets of Tony Bennett.

    Yes why did he appear in Court and she, forgot her name get off scot free? As I said I asked him but he's such a wriggler.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, Tone is the Michael Palin of the forum bubble

      whenever he came up against solid opposition he scarpered - off, to Austria or Slovakia - or wherever - unable to communicate with his flock - by either land- or fishing line.

      And then there was the Walter Mitty story of his dad or granddad accepting a letter of capitulation from the Wehrmacht on some sodden field in the Duchy of Grand Fenwick - or some other imaginary place in Europe.

      The porkies Tone tells/told are worthy of Fred Elliot.

      What's staggering is, that so many sane posters fell for his crapola for so many years

      Man is a fantasist - which would be fine if it was innocent - like the pub bore - but he has a sinister bent - metrication/Mohammed/Lubbock/Madeleine - they are all just vehicles for him - platforms from which he can preach.

      Best avoided.

      Delete
  10. Rosalinda Hutton7 September 2014 12:34

    Hi ya, delighted to tell you that Russian Doll is now posting on the new Candyfloss forum http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/ - you will find lots of familiar and friendly names there
    .....................................................
    Not one name interests me, only what they have to say.
    There is one name missing though who helped TB no end. If she's reading she will know who I mean.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I can't find the Candyfloss forum, is it a blog?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. google"blacksmith bureau" you will find the link there on todays post

      Delete
    2. Iv'e been trying to find it for weeks now,google cant find it either.
      Also why is the link posted on here not clickable,maybe it's "special members" only allowed

      Can someone please post a "clickable" link.

      Delete
    3. For some unknown reason, links here aren't "clickable" - this is the new forum.

      http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/

      Delete
  12. How sad the outcome is going to be for this young girl's parents. As soon as they said she had left home suddenly with only her phone, no money etc. It was obvious she had a call to meet someone.
    She is 14. A man age 24 has been taken in regarding her murder, not yet charged. The canal is being searched. See the wonderful dog who can detect through water.
    Those poor parents tonight. So very sad for them.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2746449/Man-arrested-suspicion-murder-detectives-investigating-disappearance-schoolgirl-Alice-Gross.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I went to Kew Gardens last Wednesday and the posters with her face on were stuck to all the trees on the roads around that area. It really brings it home to you that such a vibrant young girl could have such a tragic end to her life.

      However, I have to question at 14 years old why she left her family home at lunch time and said she would be back by the evening, where were the questions from her parents as to where she was going or who she was meeting, didn't she have a mobile phone to keep in touch, unless she left without her parents knowledge. I also believe she was anorexic, so what the hell was going on there with her going off at 14 with no parental guidance. It beggers belief.

      Delete
  13. Ok I don't know the full story but what I was told was that he took a list with him to court, announced this fact, but the judge didn't want to see it.
    A bit like Gerry and the dogs,

    ReplyDelete
  14. As early as 2007: http://www.anorak.co.uk/177703/news/twitterings/madeleine-mccann-tony-bennett-writes.html/ with comments, which could have been written today ...

    ReplyDelete
  15. If it's a list of usernames that's fair enough, any member can obtain the same list. But if it contains any personal information (email addresses, IP addresses, real names etc) then it's an entirely different matter. Has anyone seen the list?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, it was just usernames, nothing else.

      Delete
    2. I have my doubts about this list. Don't tell him, Pike! I've never heard of anyone other than Tony B being pounced on by Carter-Ruck. Wouldn't that have happened if he had handed over a list?

      Delete
    3. Thanks to Anonymous at 15.00 yesterday. I don't think there is anything wrong with stating that other unidentified people have made the same claims as yourself.

      Delete
  16. Replies
    1. Thank you to you and everyone else,i now have the link bookmarked.

      Delete
    2. Many thanks, I am trying to put it on my blog as a gadget, will get there!

      Delete
  17. rose tinted glasses and all that

    but there was in fact a time when pros/antis did not exist

    when you didn't have to declare your 'allegiance' to one camp or another

    you just declared your point of view or asked a polite question without having ad hominem thrown at you

    Bennett (and to be fair, there have been others) changed all that - they turned the simple question of 'What happened to Madeleine' into a political issue

    Decent and intelligent mods - Aurelius Mod on the Mirror Forum, springs to mind, managed to control the empire building for a while

    Amaral wrote his book

    Kate wrote her book

    quid's in all around

    Madeleine who?

    ReplyDelete
  18. 31. Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

    Why on earth not answer that - advice from solicitors or not

    What harm in answering that question truthfully?

    If a findable Madeleine had need for medication - and was found by the emergency services - that snippet of information could have saved her.

    Also the question of Gerry knowing or not knowing Robert before the disappearance.

    Also the question of António Castela Cardoso - the taxi driver who alleged that Robert/Kate and Madeleine were in his cab on the 3rd of May - being naïve I thought that would have been the first port of call for NSY when they went Algarve way - we never heard of that again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I of course don't know whether Madeleine had any health problems, but I don't think she'd ever lived at that house in Rothley. I wonder whether the holiday was to see whether the parents could take her back. As for medical records, she was a child of the state as one would be in care and therefore a ward of court.

      Delete
  19. POST 1


    I reply to the accusations by yourself and others on this blog that I supplied some kind of list of people known to be McCann-sceptics, or members of CMOMM, to either Carter-Ruck or the judge in the contempt of court trial.

    I do so with the greatest of reluctance as I have neither the time nor the money to spend refuting the countless wholly untrue and often libellous claims made by you and your commenters in a recent series of blog articles.

    I feel sure that nothing is going to stop you from continuing to make accusation after accusation and encouraging an assortment of others to do so. Which is hard to take after the specific help I gave you with your book and in answer to subsequent private e-mails from you on other matters.

    But I believe you will at least have the decency to publish in full this limited rebuttal of just three of the many false claims you and others have made about me. After all, you wrote: “Tony has the ability and the means to reply to anything posted to him here or elsewhere - something that has always been denied to his critics. Did Tony give the 'real' names of those posting on Jill's forum to the Judge or the other side, and if he did, why?”

    (Incidentally, people have always had the unfettered right to put any argument against my views on CMOMM, just as you did; those who were banned from the forum were banned for clear breaches of forum rules such as ‘attack the post, not the poster’. That’s in contrast to the way in which, I am told, you have systematically removed all comments on your blog in support of me. Will you now publish all of those?).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have post 1 and I have post 3, but no post 2? Presumably in Part 2 you have answered the question of whether or not you handed over a list of antis?

      I have no problem in publishing comments that support you Tony, however I will not publish comments that are attack me personally (nothing to do with case, sexual and abusive) and comments that attack other members who have left CMoMM.

      Aiyoyo and Plebgate may have to change their style and contemptuous attitude if they want to be published here, I put up with them for way too long on your forum and I ain't putting up with them here.



      Delete
    2. Has it ever occurred to you that Aiyoyo and Plebgate could be TB?

      Delete
    3. I always had a suspicion the Pleb was an alter-ego of TB. The only purpose of Pleb is to follow and agree with anything TB says and to get on the nerves of anyone that disagrees with TB. What a strange forum that Jill Havern place is.

      Delete
  20. POST 3

    One of your commenters, SoJ, claimed, quote: “There was most definitely a list of names Ros. TB addressed it but wriggled out in his usual fashion. Amazing how so many are devotees yet maybe five were in court”.

    S/he is utterly wrong about the ‘list of names’. On the question of ‘maybe five in court’ to support me, try asking any of the 50 or more who came, often from long distances, to support me, either on one or both days, the public gallery being so crowded that some who wanted to attend the court hearing could not get in. I shall always be grateful to them and regret that you entertain commenters who come up with such utter lies, without having the courtesy to check the facts with me first. Whose side are they really on, I wonder?

    Which brings me to my final point. In response to the manifestly ludicrous allegation made by you and many others on your blog that I have been ‘bought’ by the McCanns, the plain facts are simply these: That in May 2013, with the help of my solicitor at the time, Robin Tilbrook (as no doubt he would confirm, he negotiated a deal whereby my costs bill was significantly reduced on condition that that I abandoned (a) my appeal, already lodged, to the Court of Appeal against Judge Tugendhat’s judgment and (b) my application, made 15 months earlier, to have the undertakings I had given to be revoked. Nothing else. These were decisions I had to take most reluctantly for financial, practical and family reasons. I continue to pay Carter Ruck directly £125 per calendar month and must do so until May 2023, when I’ll be 75 years old. That’s apart from lump sums already paid to them.

    So I have not been ‘bought’ by the McCanns and those who know me know that I would be incapable of being ‘bought’ by anyone.

    I do not intend to answer any further baseless allegations made on your blog. Will you please now remove any post or comment which suggests that I handed the judge in the case, or Carter Ruck, a list of individual names.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But you still haven't replied Tony. You have said the commenter SoJ was utterly wrong about the list of names, but you didn't finish the sentence.

      To be honest, I don't really care either way Tony, I've moved on now and I've learned a few lessons.

      When we first met Tony, I admired your courage in challenging miscarriages of justice, but I did not agree with the ways in which you went about it. The only harm you appeared to be doing was to yourself, and that was your own choice. I doubt you listened to anyone.

      Bizarrely, even though your politics are of the 'hang 'em and flog 'em' variety and I'm a chilled out tree hugger, I seem to have a little more respect for the Law than yourself. Whilst I believe we have the right to challenge an obvious miscarriage of justice, we have no right to interfere with the private lives of witnesses in a criminal investigation.

      That will remain a fundamental difference between us.

      I wish you well Tony, and I am going to bring this to a close later today.

      Delete
    2. Ros don,t give this deranged lunatic the publicity he craves.
      He has put another anti-Smith rant on the CMoMM today.
      Stark raving loony.
      You cannot rationalise with a madman.
      Save your energy and considerable talents for the McCanns.

      Delete
  21. Tony perhaps you would like to remove from your forum the libellous accusation that Cristobell impersonated Martin Smith and faked an email in his name along with an apology. After that you can address the matter of your disproved hypothesis that Smith and Murat are friends. No? Didn't think so, so don't come round here telling R what to publish or retract.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous9 September 2014 07:39

      Tony perhaps you would like to remove from your forum the libellous accusation that Cristobell impersonated Martin Smith and faked an email in his name along with an apology. After that you can address the matter of your disproved hypothesis that Smith and Murat are friends. No? Didn't think so, so don't come round here telling R what to publish or retract.
      .......................................................................................
      Agree Anon and no way would I have allowed that accusation to stand. I hope Ros sent it to the investigative team at least. Had she approached CR, she may have got enough for a nice treat.

      Delete
  22. I think this is someone impersonating TB. I have evidence (circumstantial dontchaknow) so just ignore all of the above. Outrageous eh?

    ReplyDelete
  23. bennett said - "That’s apart from lump sums already paid to them."

    How much?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Rosalinda Hutton - "I am going to bring this to a close later today."

    why?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Part 2? Whooshed?
    Come on Tone, we are all waiting for the"limited rebuttal" of the list of names.
    Then Ros can close her blog.....

    ReplyDelete
  26. Tony B,

    I'll accept that no personal details were handed over. I'd also expect that when it comes to libel involving Martin Smith and Robert Murat that you don't hand over the full list of forum members claiming that we support you. It would be wrong and that's why I left CMoMM because this is what it now stands for.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Kudos to you Christobell, for allowing Tone to respond on your blog.

    I'm a lesser person and would just kick his duplicitous, wrinkled arse out of here.

    'hang 'em and flog 'em' is spot on - Bennett sees himself as judge/jury and executioner -

    McCanns - Roman Catholic - guilty by default
    Smiths - Roman Catholic and worse - Irish - guilty by default
    The Portuguese - Roman Catholic and foreign - guilty by default

    It's never Bennett's fault is it? Everyone is at fault.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Seeing the way the CMoMM forum is going I'm beginning to wonder how many aliases TB has. He is determined to put the Smiths as a main focus that they were deliberately covering for Murat and he has followers agreeing with him. But who are these people agreeing with him, are they individuals or TB in other disguises.

    I have checked out some of the followers of TB and they have had little to say in the past few weeks, other than "oh yes, I agree with that" or "well said". They have not posted anything other than a few words.

    So how many aliases does TB have on the CMoMM website. We know of one, which a poster brought to the attention of the forum, but how many more are there?

    TB is obviously part of admin although it's been denied, well it would be wouldn't it. Some of the admin team have jumped ship, so it may only leave one or two to cover the whole forum.

    If TB is admin, then anything he says goes and everyone else can take a running jump off a short pier if they don't agree with him.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is obviously Boosey as you will see from today,s post on cmomm.

      Delete
    2. TB, Sharon, Jill run that forum and are all admin.

      TB will have a minimum of at least 6 current alias'.

      Delete
  29. Bear with me on this one - and treat as cobblers as you wish

    Olegario Sousa was the PJ's spokesman from day one - his speciality was art crime but he was chosen to speak to the media because he had a pretty good command of the English language.

    The second press conf. (chaotic as the first) saw Sousa stood next to a very shy Gerry exclaiming 2 important things:

    1) 'We looked into revenge as a motive for the disappearance - we found no evidence of this.'

    2) And this is the kicker: 'Gerry McCann is the biological father of Madeleine'

    Websites and tapes might have been wiped my memory has not been

    Tie this in with Judge Hogg's WoC ruling - the exact wording you can find with a simple googling.

    Read on:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/11082517/Could-Madeleine-be-safe-and-well-cared-for.html

    Not doing a Bennett - 'I am right - always' but suggesting - that if Madeleine had been taken - Gerry & Kate might just have a better idea of who took her than anyone else.

    Hence the publishing of their telephone number - any given chance - 'Come on
    peeps - we can sort something out - coppers need never know'

    Cobblers, if you prefer

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pretty sure jeanmonroe of CMoMM is TB.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nah. Don't think so. Jeanmonroe rabbits on a lot about nothing in particular but s/he is often quite funny and witty. Tone couldn't be witty if you paid him. Boring as they come.

      Delete
  31. We're all in agreement it seems that Bennett has in no way disputed that he offered the names to the Court.
    I'd like to see the list of fifty who attended please.( He bought breakfast for the attendees. Bennett bought breakfast for fifty? Even I wouldn't do that!) Just usernames of course as I respect privacy. The two I remember giving feeds from Court are both still on JH, one under one of her six names, and another. Both are at the new site, one being a mod. Both are huge pals of Bennetts and for that reason, in spite of being a fan of Candyfloss, I won't be joining there. I don't like one foot in an enemy camp thing at all.You should break away, especially a mod called freedom or whatever she is. Now reverted to Marian at JH and yet again some other name at MM, so many I can't remember without looking.
    I will check at JH for news that hopefully Amaral knocks them out, look in here of course but I will never join a Madeleine forum again. I don't trust any of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can I get this right.
      Freedom on the new forum was NFWTD on cmomm which she has now left
      On cmomm she was previously known as Marian and before that Jean.
      She is a friend of TB and therefore can,t be trusted.
      Who is the other person on the new site if not Candyfloss?

      Delete
    2. Is she also called Lorraine on the new forum?ffs this is confusing.

      Delete
    3. I don't have any problem with people being friends with Tony - I have nothing against him personally - I disagree with the tactics that he uses and his lack of respect for the witnesses' privacy. I certainly don't want people to turn against him or be abusive in any way. We may each have drawn our own conclusions, but nothing has been proved.

      I don't want to pursue a war against Tony, I wish him and his family well, but I will continue to challenge his theories if they are in the public domain.

      Delete
  32. haha Ros, love the reference to post 2

    ReplyDelete
  33. Yes it appears Freedom (NFWTD)the moderator on the new forum is posting as Marian on CMofMM.
    If she is a friend of TB how can she be trusted Ros?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure she is, she had the courage to walk away from something she did not morally agree with.

      I am sure a lot of people will remain friends with Tony, and that is how it should be. To be honest in 'anti land' we don't really have anything to conspire about - we aren't involved in the investigation, we are merely observers!

      Delete
    2. How can anyone be trusted in La-la forumland?

      My take - judge each post on it's own merits - regardless of the poster.

      Delete
    3. Freedom worries me too. Getting things off track.

      The trouble with taking each post on it's own merits is that it disregards patterns of behaviour. Patterns are more telling of the true intent of the poster. If they put in the occasional interesting comment but mostly distract they can argue that they are contributing while completely distracting.

      Delete
  34. Is Williams-Thomas, the one who famously sat beneath a dead girl to interview her murderer a dolt or what?
    He now states that Oscar Pistorius is innocent.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2750850/Im-convinced-Oscar-Pistorius-innocent-says-journalist-spent-time-time-athlete-murder-trial.html

    I wish Bennett would look at Mark Williams-Thomas and turn up some dirt on him. he has tried and failed. I would have thought that peter mac could help, but pensions get in the way.

    ReplyDelete