I muse. Subversively.
Funny as fuck to be honest....It seems CMOMM members seem to be spending more time here than searching for the truth, after of course talking about the disappearing squirrel, or if Kates new dress is photoshopped....Why the fuck do they keep coming here ;)It must be the traffic....No red lights here BTW....Its all green signals from now on.If you do decide to come over from the other side,give us the heads up, so I can put the kettle on.....You are welcome. We dont read your PMs or anything.....Oh and we aint paranoid :)CH
OK, let me be the first to comment on Part III of 'Buried by the Anti's'Just before I went on holiday earlier this month, you wrote and asked for my help on a certain matter. In that email, you wrote: "Hi Tony, I hope you are well…I am forwarding you [snipped]…What do you make of this Tony? I know you and I do not see eye to eye on the Smiths, but its not personal as you know, and you are one of the very few people I trust...Kindest wishes".I replied promptly and fully and there was an exchange of information between us over the next few days. This ended with an email you sent me which said: "Many thanks for your considered reply. It has given me much food for thought and had a wonderful calming effect… Again, many thanks for your help Tony. Kindest wishes".For about 12 months on CMOMM, you regularly and robustly challenged my often-repeated view that Operation Grange had been a charade and a cover up from the moment it was set up, by Rebekah Brooks, in May 2011. Yet when I came back off holiday a few days ago, I saw you had written that 'It was obvious from the start that Grange was a whitewash'. So, within a few days, you had totally reversed your previous view that Grange was an honest and sincere attempt to get at the truth about what really happened to Madeleine McCann. And a 'trusted' and 'helpful' friend has now become the subject of a hate campaign on your blog.I want to ask you if you are all right?
Let me break down this post from CMOMM....Its quite funny. Here goes...Stop laughing :) Re: Cristobell's hypocrisy!Post admin Today at 10:14 pmBefore I lock this thread, as the Cristobell drama is so five minutes ago and is in no way helping to discover what really happened to Maddie, I will just add this comment seeing as she is allowing our unwanted cast-offs to post threats of violence towards Tony:Of course, this will be the unstable Andrew77R at work again.Anonymous This has gone on for too long now and is absolutely shocking. It needs to END NOW. Does anyone know where Tony Bennett lives? Somewhere in Harlow I believe. That man WILL GET his comeuppance____________________"The most despicable and, one day soon, the most infamous pair of criminals in English history."----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 Remember your being told this Cristobells hypocrisy...lol2 Wow....Its Admin....Now these fuckers are important....Take notice lol3 Fuck me....Before I lock this thread....Hang on what the fuck does that mean....Does that mean you get the LAST word....Anyway lol4 Yes Cristobel, your 5 minutes of fame is getting tiresome lol5 Shit.....Sorry all I for once did forget about Madeleine....sorry, had a lot on my mind lol6 Im a cast off....Does that mean I didnt get the part in the play ????7 Oh my Andrew, you naughty boy....lol lol 8 Not another Libel post is this....lol9 I thought that was deleted fucking hours ago on this fantastic blog....lol....Indeed it was10 Look at the signature and fucking smile.................CMOMM....Thats your Admin lolCH
For the record I deleted the post as soon as it was pointed out to me, within minutes. I apologised for letting it slip through. To screencap it and put it on JH was quite a bizarre thing to do.
It was anonymous so there's every chance it's a wind up. Imo, they want a new forum because then the debate is controlled. Out here in your blog they don't get to shut down a thread although they can still attempt to disrupt discussion.
Lots attempting to disrupt discussion Curiouser, even the pros are joining in. The pros slipped up with their support of Tony, making his motives all the more suspicious.
While I appreciate the frustration of ex JH forum members [ I am one ] wanting to vent their feelings, I hope it burns itself out soon because people need to get down to discussing this case again and thinking of ways to do it. I must admit to feeling totally indifferent to it now after more than 2 months away. It also feels better to be debating other issues such as Gaza and Ferguson on twitter, not limiting myself to the McCann case, as intriguing and important as it is. There are other massive things going on in the big wide world.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Apologies, I deleted that because I'm unable to edit it, and I made a few errors.I agree, it will fizzle out, but while people want to speak I will continue to publish their posts. I agree there are other subjects of interest out there, and I am thinking of starting a general forum, with just one section devoted to the Missing Madeleine case, and perhaps other similar cases of interest. Then the rest devoted to current news and affairs and even a cooking section, diet and health, childcare, anything of interest to those who join. All in the planning stages at the moment, but if anyone is interested in being a moderator (yeh, the last idea was crazy!) please let me know.Before anyone leaps on me, I have never run a forum, never wanted to run a forum, and declined all offers of being a moderator or admin on a forum, as many will be able to confirm. Should add, I was never offered a 'mod' job on JH. Circumstances have changed, and my daily fix has been swiped from under me. The problem is, after years of forums and crackpot rulers, I, have reached the stage where, like William Blake, I must create a system or be enslaved by another mans. To be honest, I don't know why I didn't think of it years ago, I had so much to say! Doh!I love the interaction of a forum, in the same way that I love the comments sections of newspapers, a forum offers a wide variety of views and challenges our thinking. Its nice too to have a place to 'drop in' whenever you feel like it, and have a chinwag and a giggle with someone (anyone) over a cyber cup of tea. A place you can drop in and out of whenever you like, and always find someone to chat to. And if we have a few members from over the pond, we insomniacs can even discuss the benefits of drinking green tea at 3.00am should they wish.Anyway food for thought.
from tomorrow's Mirror : British police searching for missing Madeleine McCann are poised to return to Portugal to try to solve the seven-year riddle of the girl’s disappearance.After weeks of tense negotiations, a team of Scotland Yard detectives will travel to the seaside resort of Praia da Luz next month.The latest development is described by sources close to the investigation as a “make-or-break moment”.Up to seven officers from Operation Grange will hold meetings with senior Portuguese investigators.It is understood they have been granted permission to interview up to seven key suspects identified earlier this year – three of whom will be questioned for a second time.The last time the Met officers were in Portugal, in May this year, they conducted interviews with four people, known as arguidos.The Portuguese term – normally translated as “named suspect” or “formal suspect” – refers to someone who is treated by Portuguese police as more than a witness, but has not been arrested or charged.One of them, Russian-born Sergey Malinka, has been told he is no longer under suspicion. PA Madeleine McCann, as British police returned to Portugal Missing: Maddie But now detectives have been given the go-ahead to question the remaining suspects they believe hold vital information that could help them crack the case.Analysis of mobile phone data suggests at least three of them were close to the scene when three-year-old Madeleine vanished at the resort on May 3, 2007, and were in contact in the hours that followed. A source said: “Thousands of pieces of evidence have been re-examined by the Scotland Yard team to get to this stage. This is far from a scatter-gun approach.“The detectives are acutely aware there is a finite amount of money for the investigation and that they need results. It is hoped they are on the right track to achieving those objectives.”Portuguese authorities are also understood to have granted permission for Yard officers to investigate new “areas of interest”.In May, a team of detectives led by Det Chief Inspector Andy Redwood travelled to the Algarve to supervise digs on scrubland near the resort.Julian Hamilton / Daily Mirror British police officers, led by Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood (R), leave the police station in Faro, Portugal Yard officers: Detective Chief Inspector Redwood leads policemen away from station in Faro But after eight days of searches, using sniffer dogs and ground-penetrating radar, nothing was found.Portuguese sources have described the Met probe, which has so far cost UK taxpayers more than £6million, as a senseless waste of time.Madeleine’s parents Kate, 46, and Gerry, 45, from Rothley, Leics, are not expected to travel to Portugal but are being kept informed of developments.
I reckon the robbers are a red herring. Three thieves doing their thieving thing when suddenly the small town is full of police beating bushes and checking drains. Of course they're going to ring each other and organise to get the hell out of Dodge asap.
Just before I went on holiday earlier this monthYet when I came back off holiday a few days agoHow many days did you say you were away Phony Bennett....Im not buying your newest attempt pal to fuck us over.
Thank you for not revealing the entire contents of my private email to you!For anyone interested, it was regarding the historic child abuse enquiry. Tony did indeed give me the answers I needed, but perhaps not in the way he thought.Yes indeed, I trusted you Tony, as did many others. I also offered you the hand of friendship as I feared for your mental health with the stress that you were under. I tried again and again and again, to put forward arguments that would make you see just how unreasonable you were being to those people. You dismissed all of them, and those of everyone else who tried to stop you digging yourself deeper into the mire. You think everyone is out to get you, without realising that you are your own worst enemy. A number of people reached a crisis of conscience over posting in the JH forum, Russian Doll did the honourable thing and withdrew on principle. I kept my mouth shut even as people were banned left, right and centre, including Marconi, who had the audacity to ask if the forum was based in the UK!Do you not understand that if you treat a large number of people unfairly, a large number of people will bite back when they get the opportunity. You are blaming everything onto me, when you know darn well the rot set in a long time ago. Look at the response this blog is getting, you have treated so many people so shoddily, you can't now be surprised that they are protesting!As for my views, I haven't reversed anything. If you read my posts properly you will see that I believe the disappearance was covered up at the START. That is back in the summer of 2007 - not now, now I haven't got a clue what is going on, and neither do you. However, I still have faith in humankind and justice, and from what we have seen from the investigation, it looks pretty darn real. You should know yourself how frustrating it is to be cut off mid sentence and gagged from saying what you truly believe, yet you pull the plug on posters you dislike for the most ridiculous, and indeed sinister reasons. This is not a hate campaign Tony, these are all the unfinished words of those you so rudely aborted.And now that you have raised the subject of a hate campaign, I see you have accused me of forging the email to Richard D. Hall. What kind of campaign is that Tony?Maybe it is time for YOU to answer a few questions Tony, not Mr. Smith.
So the consensus of opinion here is to express your frustrations by f'ing and blinding? What does that achieve. Assuming a lot of you (some by admission) are either members or ex-members of Jill Havern's forum did you take the opportunity to express yourselves when participating as an active member, or do you wait for someone else to do the dirty work by starting up a place to air your vulgarity?Try to remember one thing. I don't know how many members there are registered on Havern's but Bennett is not the only one. There are I'm sure many members who are genuine and not led by any other, why everyone just assumes that because any one person posts on a particular forum that they are part of a cult I shall never understand. It seems to me to be only a reason to justify all the unhelpful comments posted here.Is it really worth destroying a forum that has been running for a long time, with a lot of good people involved, only for the sake of revenge? Think about it.
No actually I don't "get the picture". Perhaps you could explain?
I expressed myself but threads and posts were deleted for no other reason than they did not toe the party line. There is a party line and it is TB's, if you share his paranoid delusions you probably have a better time there.
There is a very necessassary accompaniment to any forum, and that is a framework of rules, and these are decided and enforced, by site owners' and moderators' . They do the hard work, therefore they get to make the decisions.
Absolutely, and the decision of the JH forum is to support the libellous accusations of a prominent member and not tolerate any reasoned questioning on the subject. So I left.
I can see now that there has to be a framework, but the framework at JH was so darn pompous most people were afraid to post! There was no sense of welcome to new members, in fact, they were pounced on, interrogated and accused of being other people. How many began their posts by saying they were long time lurkers, scared away from posting by the pack. I ventured in with trepidation and I am as tough as old boots!
Well said. Another sign of the bad attitude of Mr Bennett was his post about Mr Smith only needing to be courageous and tell the unvarnished truth, put it in the public domain, about his encounter with man and child that night...and speak about his relationship with Murat. Who does Tony think he is. demanding such things? I hope he leaves this place alone and carries on merrily destroying what little credibility the JH forum has left.
Hear Hear Cristobell.
What are you deaf?
anon @ 15.53 for your benefit seeing as you have problems understanding a basic phrase used in everyday life: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hear,_hear
Oh my good God, go and read Blacksmith's latest...
The blacksmith is not the case guru. He is another member of the public with an opinion, right or wrong, don't try to make him out as an authority.
Hilarious and much appreciated, Blacksmith xx
where in my info about the latest from BS did I imply I thought he was the case's oracle? Oh my good God is an expression of shock/surprise and a reader could equally infer that I was horrified or pleasantly surprised by his strong piece of no- holds-barred writing.
I did not read where Bennett asked Smith to tell the truth and to put it in the public domain wtf? So 9 members of the Smith family have to be lying to fit in with Tony's belief that Murat is involved in Maddie's demise? I hope they both sue him. I would in their position.
That forum is destroying itself and driving people away. I had the courage of my convictions and said exactly what I thought before I left and I do not indulge in vulgarity. I do not think anyone who holds the place in contempt should be wasting energy on criticising it, if I am honest, so I won't post again here about it. I understand banned members stating here what they could not there, having no right to reply after being banned/ insulted, but I agree it will go around in circles and once people have got stuff off their chests, it would be good to get back to the case.... it is more important than anything else.
Very fair comment. I will only say that Cristobell was not banned, her membership was suspended for only one week, nothing in the grand scheme of things. If she chooses to use it as an affront there is nothing I can do to change that. I only ask that if people feel the need to branch out on yet another crusade in support of justice for Madeleine McCann, then leave aside personal confrontation and stick to the important issues.None of us are paragons of virtue, we all have our own views, which does not mean one is right and another is wrong. If a member of Jill Havern's forum you have the opportunity to post your views, you are not banned or excommunicated or suspended purely because you object to another's opinion, in spite of what people here are trying to impress. Don't blow the whole thing out of proportion.This is not about Bennett or Cristobell or Havern or any other participant, it is about Madeleine McCann who lost her life as a result of her parents, her parents what, that is the question!
As a child in the convent I had to stand in line to receive my punishments, always unjust and unfair. As an adult, I'm not going to allow some tosspot on the internet to do that to me again. If you think I am going to sit in a cooler for a week then return with my tail between my legs thanking you for showing me see the light, you can think again!
No I don't think that at all. I just think it futile to waste time and energy bitching when Madeleine McCann's fate remains a mystery.Still this is your blog so it's not my place to dictate how people conduct themselves but I don't think you will last very long if it's only purpose is to trash another forum.As a matter of interest, when you were a child in a convent standing in line to receive punishment, was this situation condoned by the childrens parents or legal guardians? A serious question.
It is a port in a storm 04:27, a place for people to respond, as their rights of reply were removed by their old forum. A lot of angry people out as you can see.I have no intention of spending the rest of my time on this case bashing Tony Bennett, there are much bigger fish to fry. I enjoyed my time on JH and there are many posters there that I admire. However, this has been an enlightening few days and many of us have had our eyes opened. For myself, I won't be returning to the forum as it has a clear agenda, which imo, is not to uncover the truth behind Madeleine's disappearance. As a child I was in care, not only was this condoned by our legal guardians (Catholic Church), it was positively encouraged.
here is the info for the poster who did not see Tony Bennett saying the following on JH forumTony Bennett on Wed Aug 20, 2014 6:53 pmPeterMac wrote:jeanmonroe wrote:Does anyone know which TWO of the Smith family, they were EIGHT, actually 'collaborated' with PI's in the drawing up of the two 'e-fits' in 2008?Or to put in another way"Does anyone know IF ANY of the Smith family actually 'collaborated' with PI's in the drawing up of the two 'e-fits' in 2008 ?"It seems highly likely that the answer may be NOThat's quite right - and I agree the answer may be 'No'.Among the many questions that this opens up is WHAT did the Smiths and DCI Andy Redwood discuss in their TWO admitted meetings, one in 2012 and one in 2013?Is it possible, for example, that the Smiths DECLINED permisssion for them to be associated with the two e-fits, explaining perhaps why Matthew Amroliwala of BBC Crimewatch did NOT actually say that these e-fits were drawn up by the Smiths, but instead said - enigmatically - they were drawn up by 'two of the witnesses'? On the other hand, the Daily Mirror article dated 16 October 2013, quoted up the thread, purports that Martin Smith spoke to the Mirror the day before and he appears from the Mirror article to have endorsed these e-fits.If only Martin Smith were courageous enough to come out and tell us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about his dealings with (a) the McCanns' private investigators and (b) DCI Andy Redwood (and about his relationship to Robert Murat) , we would understand a whole lot more about important matters relating to Madeleine McCann's reported disappearance..
So rather than whinging about someone else's opinion, what is yours?
Are you the same poster who made the inference,based on nothing, that I was praising BS merely by telling people he had written something relating to JH forum? Now you read a post from that forum, without comment, and infer that I am whingeing.... where is your evidence for that? My opinion is not the issue, btw, what was the issue was the way anyone who disagreed with the Smith is a liar theory was verbally abused by Tony Bennett. Why I left. My responses to Mr B and his clique of the faithful were always firm but polite and with no obscene language or abuse and I explained clearly why I was leaving a forum supposedly promoting free speech. All was fine there until a bee was in the bonnet about Smith and the man and child he saw.Until then I had never seen such unpleasantness, sarcasm, allegations that you were there to disrupt , insinuations not the courage of a direct accusation of being a treacherous interloper. If he had been direct I at least could have said TB had the courage of his convictions, but instead it was innuendo and snide nasty juvenile playground-style sniping. I really don't want to read anything or say anything more about the man, but you and others keep the TB flame burning by moaning about Cristobell's attitude. If you don't like it, why don't you just go? You and others with the same opinion are the ones keeping TB a subject for debate on here !
It takes two to tango!
The MMU - why employ monkeys when they own the zoo? Use your Editorial Intelligence. It's all one big fat psy/spy op.
CMoMC is really the Media Monitoring Unit? As in Team Mccann's MMU? Ha Ha almost funny.
what are you talking about?
oh dear. Mr Smith and is family received a visit from Brian Kennedy [an unwanted visit] and neither Martin Smith nor his family have had any dealings with Murat or Andy Redwood. I am forwarding that screenshot to Martin for his perusal.
Anon at 16:01 I fully support that. Once people have got stuff off their chests they should move on, else it will be viewed as malicious and vindictive than anything else.Cristobel may feel indignant, of her own doing btw, but to carry on bashing JH Forum and to allow her blog as platform for trolls and shills to denigrate JH forum and members isn't going to achieve any thing expect give her a bad name as a woman scorned seeking revenge.Enough is Enough.I feel sorry for those genuine ones who were banned. CB I find it harder to sympathy with because of her treacherous behavior. JH had allowed her to promote her blog only for her to use it to destroy as well as encourage the destruction of JH forum that will not go down well in all quarters. One thing people hate more than anything else is traitor.
The biggest traitor is your Admin...They have eyes in the back of their heads and in your PMs.....Fucking wise up FFS
Oh get over yourself, treachery indeed! I stood up to the bullying admin and socked it right back at 'em. And if you haven't noticed, I was merely the latest in a long line of people so shabbily removed from the forum for not toing the party line!I didn't wreck the forum, the jackboot authority of whoever runs the place did that. Admin were reading people's private messages, demanding threads remain on approved topics, and banning people on a whim. I'm not responsible for any of that my friend - that came from within the forum. The majority of us who fight for justice for Madeleine McCann are not 'pitchforkers', we do not want to pry into peoples' private lives and we hope and trust that the police will do their jobs. Saying that should not be a banning offence.The forum was/is a place to discuss aspects of the case and indeed to let the powers that be know, that we know. However, in investigating the witnesses, Tony overstepped the boundarys of common sense and decency, and not one of you so called friends did anything to stop him and in fact you aided and abetted him! No matter how outlandish and barmy his accusations are, you just keep going along with it, egging him on. Even I noticed the stony silence when he accused me of forging Martin Smth's email. Most people couldn't care less that I have left the forum, it was neither here nor there, what they do care about is a forum they trusted spying on their private messages and using their emails for who knows what. Incidentally, I posted on the JH forum because I enjoyed it. And I do my blog because I enjoy it - do you see any adverts anywhere?As for my being a traitor, a traitor to what? I was only a dissenter last week, now I am an out and out traitor. I swore no allegiance to anyone when I joined the forum, I'm not an allegiance sort of person. So who have I betrayed, the person who put me in the cooler for a week? Or the agenda to discredit the witnesses?
re: "oh dear. Mr Smith and is family received a visit from Brian Kennedy [an unwanted visit] and neither Martin Smith nor his family have had any dealings with Murat or Andy Redwood. I am forwarding that screenshot to Martin for his perusal".REPLY: OK, now let's have the facts. Martin Smith admitted that he had known Robert Murat for at least '2 years' before May 2007 and had 'met him on several occasions'. Scotland Yard's Operation Grange have released information to say they interviewed Martin Smith 'once in 2012 and once in 2013'. On 14 October 2013 The Met and BBC Crimewatch released TWO e-fits of faces which look like completely different men. Did the Smiths see TWO men?
Tony don't start accusing the Smiths on here. I won't publish what I consider to be libel.There are many other questions of far more interest to all those who have responded, and those questions surround your determination to discredit the witnesses. Those are the answers we want Tony, at the moment, many think your reasons are dishonourable.
Tony....go and empty your mouth somewhere else. I have never ever trusted you....This aint the last 10 minutes on my part...I am a very good judge of character, sorry I am....I know a wrongun when I see one. Now kindly go away and find a 5th forum to destroy. And take that fucking squirrel with you....He totally does my fucking swede in.
I'm sorry but DCI Redwood the chief investigating officer, N.B. not Tony Bennett or Peter Mac, has said on CW the two e- fits are of the SAME individual he said this twice during the programme.So once again Bennett's facts are worthless just his opinion and now his lies are regurgitated here.
I think what Martin Smith said has been completely taken out of context. He said what he said without realising it would be twisted against him. He said "he had known Murat for a couple of years" probably intending to mean that he's known him by sight around the resort and in the bars, not as some "pal" who he hung out with and went partying with etc.I know many people by sight in the town I live in, I see them most days when I'm out and about but I've never had a conversastion with them, we may smile in recognition or just say "hi". I could say to the police "yes, I've known them for some years" without thinking to add "by sight only". I would hate to find myself then being accused of knowing someone for years when I actually didn't.
02:44 You are spot on in the way Mr. Smith's words have been distorted. They say communication is 93% non verbal, it is therefore ridiculous to draw inferences on so few words. Tony has not met the Smiths, his conclusions are drawn from a fraction of the evidence and an obsessive desire to make those words fit his theory that Robert Murat is involved.DCI Redwood has met the family, who knows how many times. His belief in their evidence was strong enough for him to focus an entire Crimewatch program on this lead. Goncalo Amaral was also following this line of enquiry when he was removed from the case.Perhaps Tony wants to be 'the one' who solves this case, but he is trying to do so without access to any of the available evidence - he is working on police files that are 7 years old. In my opinion, he has crossed a line, he is interfering with the investigation by demanding that the witnesses for the prosecution answer HIS questions! The idea is ludicrous to any rational, thinking person, yet the JH forum is encouraging the lunacy.
It would be very appreciated if CMOMM members that decide enough is enough would just state their alias name, so it sends a true message that you have had enough. Im not trying to find out who you are, just trying to show that you truly are fed up with the corruption and are willing to start afresh.....Thankyou....It sends a message of I tried to help Madeleine Beth McCann, but you spied on me....You understand what Im asking..You dont have to of course....But it shows your enlightenment :)I would be over the moon if aquila and Clay joined us...CH
Good one CH!Whatever else comes out of this episode, I doubt it will involve Aquila and I acting in unison....
I already have outed myself but my message to others is don't, unless you want to. It doesn't show your enlightenment, it just allows them to go back through your posts looking for fodder to feed their frenzy. Aquila was nothing but ugly to me most of the time so I would hope they don't join in a new forum. That's the problem. The disrupters will attempt to get themselves in on the ground floor so they can control the way the conversation goes again. I have no idea how to stop that but it is a tactic they've succeeded with before and may again.
Wow Clay....Welcome bud. I initially couldnt understand your post lol, I thought I had pissed you off in some way....I would never intend to do that, I just was worried....Anyway, how are you bud ? I knew you were a hard thinker and a deep looker....Remember who had concerns over a year ago ;)I always thought yourself and aquilas posts were in jest....I obviously took myself away from the forum thinking Clay can handle himself.....And you did, and thats why I thought it was just banter between yourselves. Perhaps I have been dumb. I am glad you have spoken....I can once again think. Your a top man.....I fucking know that.I always said most of my posts were hard to explain, because Im crap at putting it down on paper......But I was right Clay.....I was right. I just knew the site was not quite kosher. Im not going to rabble on (lol) but Im so fucking glad your here.If I had to seperate your differences with Aquila (I lost track after fucking off for a while) I can only explain that I liked Aquila, not in a good on ya girl way, but someone who would question. You stood up to her and I smiled and I think she did too.....Your a shrewd man. Your needed.When a new forum opens up....we can all get back to the good times :)Missed you bud.....Fucking missed you. Your a thinker :)CH
Anon at 17:09.No one is my admin, I was a member there but not any more.I am a free person with independent thoughts unstained from influence.Just an objective view that moaning and whinging get one nowhere in the greater scheme of things. Remember Madeleine? The little girl people purport to care for. Bear her in mind, she is the more important issue, not this bitching about.
They can read our PMs but they can never take our freedom!
Mr Bennett should be grateful that I have more integrity than he does, or the other forum admin, because something in a PM to me from him clearly showed the extent of his paranoia and mental instability. I would never and will never put this into the public domain, it was shocking. I felt sorry for the man and despite my annoyance at the attitude from him described by Ros, I think he needs help for his mental wellbeing. The first thing he should do is leave the forum and get his life with his family back, instead of immersing himself in the Maddie case to the point of unhealthy obsession. Anyone who can write pages and pages of repetitive speculation about one aspect of the case needs a healthier life. The middle east is up in flames, trouble in Ukraine, police in the US shooting unarmed young black males and he is obsessed about Maddie. Correction, he is obsessed about the players in the affair, not the child any more. He is his own worst enemy and those claiming to by loyal to him seem to be the ones fanning the flames.
On the other hand nobody asks J K Rowling why she spends thousands of hours writing about goblins or whatever.You make some good points though
Rosalinda I BEG you, PLEASE do no allow that dreadful man a voice here. He has a whole effin forum to spew his nonsense and I for one NEVER want to hear him again. SILENCE him like he did all of us.
Maybe the paranoia is getting to me too but the Clarrie mindless headlines today are very well timed. Very interesting.
"Tony Bennett22 August 2014 14:37OK, let me be the first to comment on Part III of 'Buried by the Anti's'"wrong yet again - second!
@ Christobel Try and remove the hate, anger and revenge from your soul. It is not doing you any good
I think you should have sent your post to Sillypelter(lazzerri)she is the one full of hate.
Sallypelt is not l-azzeri as she stated herself. IMO JeanMonroe is l-azzeri. JeanMonroe likes to put words in CAPITALS for emphasis. So does l-azzeri. Look at the writing style of both.
Bennett is trying to bully you.Please bin all posts from him.We have had enough of his madness.Thank you cristobell
There are two points re the Smith sighting that Bennett keeps on banging on about on Havern's. One is why the Smiths took two weeks before reporting their sighting. The other is how Martin Smith could be so sure it was Gerry McCann he saw on 3rd May just by the way GM was carrying his child. Bennett claims that most parents carry tired or sleeping children this way. Quite a number of posters on Havern's agree with him. CB, can you please provide us with a good response to Bennett's two point, thanx
02:51 There are any number of reasons for the delay in the Smiths reporting their sighting (if indeed there was a delay) and in my response to Richard D.Hall, back a couple of blogs, I have suggested a number of scenarios. But the answer is, we simply don't know. Logically, the idea that they are involved in perverting the course of justice in a major crime however, is the LEAST likely. We have seen how Tony's brain works with his recent accusation that I forged the email from Martin Smith. I write a blog, I don't agree with Tony, ergo, I must have done it!Regarding the second point, the way in which Gerry carried S*** down the steps of the plane and Mr. Smith's recognising him, again, there is a very good explanation for this. The brain, even the brain of total ejits, is far superior to even the most the advanced computer. We are constantly storing images for future reference, its the reason we have evolved and survived. To survive we had to recognise danger in a nanosecond or get our heads bitten off by a T-rex. Every word we speak, every thought we have, is a result of previous information stored by our ever efficient brains. We know a banana is a banana because we have seen one before, its immediately recognisable. If we see a kumquat, we might not be so sure, is it a tiny orange, a tangerine, we are searching our vast data bases to find the name, and we are searching in the fruit aisle not the root vegetables.What has all this to do with Martin Smith's recognition of Gerry. Mr. Smith's brain works extremely well, he saw an image that he had seen before, which is why, understandably, he was so distressed by it. It wasn't just the way in which Gerry carried the child. Mr. Smith has no doubt seen thousands if not millions of people carrying children that way, we all see it all the time, in supermarkets, parks etc, dads carrying their small children. To say his recognition was based solely on the way in which the child was being carried is ludicrous. If that were the case, every man seen by Mr. Smith carrying a child in THAT way, would be named by Mr. Smith as the abductor.There was far more to Mr. Smith's recognition than even he may have been aware of. We are much more than individual parts. Mr. S, saw the whole picture, the man's age, height, demeanour the entire Mr. M, if you like. Had Clarence carried S*** down those plane steps, it would have had no effect whatsoever on Mr. Smith's memory bank. Even if the child had been carried by a man of similar height, build weight, hair colour etc, as Gerry, Mr. Smith would not have had that spark of recognition, the image stored in his memory bank was quite specific. If we don't know what a kumquat is, we will not walk away calling it an orange, our efficient brains will reject that. We know it isn't an orange. We match things to the knowledge we already have, even if we are not aware of it. Mr. Smith matched the image he saw with one he had seen previously. It is not a conscience decision, the mechanics of the brain and the emotional side don't always get along, that's the reason why he was so troubled by what he had seen.
Our gaits and movements are as individual as fingerprints.
I don't like the way a family have been labelled as "liars" just to suit a theory. The documentary was simply a sly way to ensure compliance. I don't always see eye to eye with PeterMac however IMO he did an excellent job in dealing with the fallout and had it been left with him we'd all be working together to solve the mystery of what happened to little Madeleine. To those who argue that Cristobell is simply a drama queen who was banned for a week please note:When JH allowed SL to wade in there and bait & goad Cristobell it was clear that the Smith debate is well and truly over and you must accept they are liars if you want to swim in the big people's pool. I can't speak for Cristobell but I won't be part of a forum that believes that this family lied. It's now a required belief. Admin/TB challenges everyone's posts, it's ingrained in every thread and whether or not you are aware by logging into CMOMM each day you are agreeing with and accepting this belief. You're not doing Madeleine any good by calling a 12 year old lass a liar. How many more "FACTS" are fundamentally flawed?
03:06 Good question. How many more Bennett myths have become facts in this case. I have to confess, I stopped reading a lot of Tony's research, a long time ago, when I saw that he was manipulating the facts to fit certain scenarios. That is not honest research imo, because it is fundamentally flawed.He has done well in uncovering most of the phoney detectives hired by the McCanns, would we have known about the link between Edgar, Cowley and the phoney agency? Credit where it is due. However, the disappointment in discovering there is an agenda opens questions as to everything else we have been told as gospel. I don't about anyone else, but I am feeling somewhat stupid and could kick myself for accepting ANY of Mr. B's theories without checking them out thoroughly. I think however, that there may be several people thinking about suing him when all this is over.This case begins and ends with the McCanns. All of this is a distraction and not important in the whole scheme of things. Again, my mind goes back to Life of Brian and all the loony factions killing each other before they reached the real enemy. The pros are presently leaping with joy and pointing out that Tony does at least produce reams of work to support his arguments, whilst my response to their taunts and demands for proof is 'kiss my arse'.And of course Tony has shown his commitment to Madeleine - he's the good guy! Course he is. If they can actually find someone to read all his work, they have all the foundations for the McCanns' defence!
the Smiths were lying as Tony claims Martin Smith would have made also lied about knowing Bennett. He would have clarified that he only knew Murat to see.
Your post at 04.58"He has done well in uncovering most of the phoney detectives hired by the McCanns, would we have known about the link between Edgar, Cowley and the phoney agency? Credit where it is due."**********************************I don't think we all needed TB to uncover the link between the phoney detectives hired by the McCanns. Many of us had worked that out for ourselves a long time ago without TB's help.As for anon at 05.48Anon could you reprint your post in good plain English please so that we can all understand it. Thanks very much.
How funny it is to read the comments of all these bitter people claiming that CMOMM is 'on its last legs' and 'in its death throes' etc. etc. LOL! That claim's been made many times before by disgruntled disruptors, yet the number of CMOMM members and viewers just keeps on going up and up. Fume away if it makes you feel better!
Perhaps you should run along over and play some A-Z games. That'll keep it ticking over.
To those who accused Cristobell of derailing multiple threads:Open your eyes, TM aren't the only ones who can spin. The Smith angle was carefully and pervasively placed across the threads on JH in order to manipulate and control.
Then why do you support the labelling of the Mccanns and family et al as "Liars" to suit a theory? Isn't it the same thing? Why be selective I dont see any difference in it?Don't kid yourself. The labelling of anyone as "Liar" equally amount to harassment. CB's manipulation tactic of using a 12-year-old to tag at heart strings to lend weight to her argument is pathetic, to cast aspersion on TB, is deliberate attempt to cause polarisation.CB had no researched materials to support her points thus she recklessly threw a child into the equation hoping to provoke emotions to win side.Every discerning person can see her dirty tactic except her cult followers with mud for brain.Why discriminate and select who one can or can't label as "Liar" when that labelling is invariably concluded based on the examining of inconsistencies, oddities, and coincidences?
My research is flawed! Tony did not know that the witness was a 12 year old child! He went full steam ahead with thousands and thousands of pages of nonsense, without realising he was accusing a child of lying to the police. He thought she was Mrs S, she wasn't, she was his daughter. Any normal person would have stopped at that point, but no, he wants copies of her fucking school reports! Eeeek, stress pills required!
You are lying again (as usual).Supply proof he asked for the school reports, otherwise don't be telling porky pie.You proved you're lying actually - as why would he ask for school reports if he did not realise it was a child?Don't tell me you expect people to believe he asked for school reports believing the Mrs attends school?Your nose is growing.bb1
1. Go to the research yourself2. Kiss my arseIncidentally, why are you BB1, a known pro, here defending Tony Bennett?And if you want a reply published, keep a civil tongue in your head and state your case clearly and reasonably, I have no time for oafs.
T9 put themselves firmly into the ring when they used the media to manipulate the truth so I consider them "fair game". I personally draw the line at dragging a teenager into the dirt. I guess we all have different morals.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Your reply shows you to be an arsehole.Now I bet you won't print that, coward.You will dish it out but wont take it. Hypocrite!bb1
To keep publishing these comments, and let's be honest here, they're not from BB1, you are encouraging further trolling. I read a few comments back asking people who have been banned from JH to identify themselves. If you are allowing "Anonymous" to pretend to be BB1, Sabot and Lily when they clearly are not, what's to stop them posing as posters on JH?
I can't allow or disallow people from being anything they want to be. If I have editing powers, I don't know how to use them. There is no 'clearly they are not' about it. The dingbats thought they were on roll so they took time from STMs little den of evil to come sling their faeces around over her. They have been on my back for years, lol, I recognised the little turds instantly! Oops massive slip up there eh, why were they supporting Tony, and why have they now taken up the Smiths are wrong banner where Tony has been cut off? Go on, sod off, go back to your sewer.
I think you have made the entire point yourself. They do not now, and they never have supported Tony Bennett. They post on their own site and have done for years. Their posts there demonstrate different use of language entirely What editing powers are you referring to? You say a little further down that you have been deleting comments, why not simply delete these? You certainly control what is and is not published. I have some good news for you : The "pros" aren't posting here. One item of bad news though: Whoever is posting here, pretending to be them is doing your credibility no good at all..
Anon@23.57Now you got it - why Cristobel's tiresome diatribe was not wanted on JH forum?Trying to influence CB to you will is pot calling kettle black. Own goal that.
If Cristobell's diatribe is so tiresome what exactly are you doing here?
Making the point the IRONY of the post asking that TB's voice be denied here. Catch up, you are slow.Lily
Another answer:Pose yourself the same question: what were you doing at JH forum .It's called tit for tat.sabot
Hi Sabot, I was looking for justice for a little girl called Madeleine when I was on JH. I just didn't realize they were going to bash around a 12 year old girl in the process of finding justice so I left.
Lily, how many voices were denied on JH?
SABOT: Another known pro here supporting Tony Bennett and the Jill Havern forum. Have you all joined forces?
Any one would join force against you, traitor.Worst kind of low pond life.Sabot
You do realise these aren't the genuine posters, don't you?
They are genuine, you haven't seen the ones I deleted.
It's now a required belief. Admin/TB challenges everyone's posts, it's ingrained in every thread and whether or not you are aware by logging into CMOMM each day you are agreeing with and accepting this belief. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Equally, can it be said that by logging in to Cristobel Unbound you are supporting and abetting the bashing of JH forum members?
Lets be fair here, while there are still some great posters on JH they are well & truly able to bash each other, there's not much here that hasn't already been said over there.
I agree there are some great posters there.Rest of your points are crap.
Sometimes we must all agree to disagree. You're free to consider my points crap however I'm wondering what you are still doing here.
What do you think?bb1
I propose a poll,1. who loves bennett?2. who hates bennett?3. who couldn't care less about bennett?assume loads of blue bold font to make me influence your vote!
Now who dares put a message on JH notifying that there is a new Blacksmith. Oh how fucking funny... ;)
Until Friday 25th October 2013 Tony Bennett believed Aoife Smith was an adult and it was an adult that gave a police statement.To add to his confusion he also believed Aoife was Martin Smiths grand daughter, so much for his Research.If you want positive proof go to CMOMM Smithman 2, 17 similiarities and look at pages 10 and 11 where TB clearly states in posts between 11.44pm and 12.21am Aoife was an adult. TB does lots of research the only trouble is, its crap,he can't even bother to check or understand basic facts. Check it out for yourselves, before its erased.
I think you are spot on there JJ. But having discovered her real age, he should have left it there. His continuing with his theory after that really was unforgiveable, and might even call into question laws regarding future cases and the interfering with witnesses. The majority of us have moral boundaries and know where to draw the line. Unfortunately, the line has long been passed by those supporting this lunacy.
Let's hope that we can all learn from this experience; it's wrong to ban people from forums and groups for having different opinions unless they are clearly disruptive and abusive.
Good comment, Terry. Given a bit more give and take and a bit more diplomacy things could have been very different.
By the same token, perhaps you should be able to have private threads so you can have a discussion without people taking it off track. Diplomacy doesn't help against determined disruptors.
Hi. Who can resist this psychodrama?I brooded for a while on the question of "why do the loony McCann supporters hate Rosalind Hutton so much more than they hate Bennett - and spend so much more time slagging her off in the most pathetically bitchy way than they do Wispy B?"It seems so weird, doesn't it? The first answer I came up with is that Wispy is very dear to the shills because he is a born loser who always gets his facts wrong and is easily crushed into humiliating apologies when his victims, like Kennedy, bark at him. So whenever anything suspicious and significant emerges about the couple Wispy is in there first misinterpreting it; all the shills have to do thereafter is argue with him and his fantastic misinterpretations of everything he is ever told - child's play. The noise then drowns out the significance of the original discovery, It has happened time and time and time again. The second reason is slightly weirder. Before Matron "Tubes" Jill founded her site there was an odd period when all the shills joined a forum run by an odd little fellow with delusions of grandeur calling himself Chaos Raptor, an extreme supporter of the McCanns who Wispy Bennett then teamed up with as an investigative organization!.For weeks - literally - the forum was dominated by the shills who now make up Nessling's Nursery and JAT coming out and claiming that they'd been "brainwashed", literally brainwashed, by the 3As forum where many of them had worked as ferociously anti-McCann moderators.It really was very strange: the language was that of a Baptist, a revivalist meeting or a particularly wild Alcoholics Anonymous session every day, all of them shouting how they were now "cured" and how (I am not making this up) "they didn't know what had taken them over" when they had been at 3As and had "mentally purified" themselves by leaving.And that's the second answer: deep down, and despite the supposed differences, they are pure cult fodder themselves, always in search of certainties and the strong buttock-slapping hand that a Guru offers. Unlike Bennett you're much too normal for them Ros. And they like people to stay loyal to little cults because they themselves, who shriek of being undeceived, are pure disciples - as that forum demonstrated conclusively. B
Anon at 14.50 posted - Of course, this will be the unstable Andrew77R at work again.Not sure what your trying to accuse me of here Tony, Jill, or Pleb. I have posted 3 comments on Cristobells blog and just been honest why I was banned from your forum. I think it's Tony (as evidently everyone else does) who is the unstable one. The guy is not right in the head. It's as simple as that. I actually feel sorry for Tony. What a sorry and sad life he lives. Andrew.
Someone posted a veiled threat to Tony Bennett and the anonymous poster seems to think it was you. Have you ever made any threats against him, even if intended as a joke?
Good heavens no, not even in jest! As if! lol. I'm more of a fragile Miss Marple than weapon wielding thug. I have a clean CRB, no criminal history, and a lifetime of people who will confirm I am an all round good egg. I have never threatened anyone in my life!
Rosalinda: sorry, I was replying to Andrew's post at 10.23. He didn't understand the reference to "unstable Andrew77R at work again". I said there had been a post (quickly deleted) making a threat to Tony.That's why I asked Andrew if he had ever done anything like that which would explain the "unstable Andrew" comment.Sorry once again for the misunderstanding.
No they're just propagandists like almost everyone else discussing and/or writing about the case B. They just chose the opposite side in a case with very little definite evidence either way. Very little.
I see the Jill Havern forum is open to the public again.What was the reason for the 24 hour shut down. Anybody know?
Blacksmith whoever you are, you just do not know how funny that is for those of us on the receiving end of the cesspit. Absoloutely priceless. I didn't understand your your humour about the cesspit at all the first time. I sure as hell do now. Thank you for the laughs. Funny Funny Funny. And so sorely needed. ;)
For what it's worth, I read this forum and also still post on the JH forum. I don't agree with TB and ignore his posts but I still believe in Madeleine and she should have a say on that forum by members who care. Don't forget that forum is read by people from all over the world and to deny Madeleine her voice is like saying "we're giving up, TB has won". No, he hasn't won, he can say whatever he wants, people can read posts and deduce what they want. They can make their own minds up, I doubt many of them are influenced by TB.If you're scared of your pms being read, simple, don't send any.By giving up and saying "no, I'm not posting on that OTHER forum again" is saying you're giving up on Madeleine. Please don't do that.
You do realise, that qyuite some of us would like to post, but we cannot ... ?Having been banned, excluded, out ...
@anon 10.32I read this blog and also read the JH forum. I don't agree with TB but the thing is I got banned for not agreeing with him. As has a lot of people by the looks of it. To me that is not fair especially as all this should be about Madeleine and to find out the truth of what really happened. It's frustrating and extremely annoying that I can't continue to debate on the JH forum. The reason why I can't is nothing whatsoever to do with Madeleine. The reason I can't is the fact that I disagree with Tony sodding Bennett.
But I feel that posting on it is agreeing that the Smith family are liars. There's no option to debate it, that avenue is closed.
Cristobell, there are many ignorant, nasty bullying people in this world. And there seems to have been a disproportionate number on here directing their venom towards you.From what I have seen of you over the years you have done nothing to deserve this behaviour. Even if I do not always agree with you, you have always conducted yourself with dignity and compassion. I am sure that these great qualities in you are being seen as a weakness, and like a pack of scavenging hyenas are rounding up for an easy kill.I am disgusted by the antics of people from both sides of the McCann argument who resort to name calling and bullying.CB keep strong, keep good counsel and have a good rest away from all this.DZ
Thanks DZ, you are a good bud :) The vitriol is completely over the top DZ and it is coming from both sides now! I think I have upset the applecart. I see on twitter, the pro McCann shills have picked up where Tony was cut off. That is they are trying to sell the idea that the Smiths evidence is useless. Lol, now they've got that as well those darn dogs to contend with!Excellent advice, think I will lose myself in a good movie! Kindest wishes to you x
It doesn'tmatter what the McCann shills are saying about the Smiths evidence. They have no say in whether it's useless or not. That decision would be up to a Judge in a court of law if the McCanns were ever brought to trial. The shills can protest until they're blue in the face, it won't make an iota of difference.
If Tony was just honest, then things can be cleared up...The accusation of Cristobell being the sender of the email is not on.....bang out of order. He needs to be honest and admit he sent it....We are asking why implicate Cristobell....Why so shallow....It has pissed us offWhy Tony ?CH
587 comments.... :)CH
Cristobell - Woofer here. This is awful. Just look at the pond-life that`s posted in these comments. Your blog is really being shat on.I agree with everything DZ has posted above. Yes, there are some right shallow cowbags on JHs, but you`ve got 10 times worse on here and have attracted pros - a whole flipping swarm of them with their stingers out.What gets me is how a few agitators have caused the hate filled polarisation that was once merely a disagreement. For many, many months it has been a dignified and respectful discourse between you and Tony - it is only outsiders that have caused this almighty cavern to open up and get worse daily as you each hit the ball back more and more aggressively (and have the agitators egging you both on). It was the agitators that provoked your `can`t be arsed` comment, not Tony.We all have our flaws and foibles, including Tony. He does get things wrong very occasionally (sorry Tony) but he also apologises when he gets things wrong (usually!). You were bringing up the Smiths on inappropriate threads as has Tony in the past - you`ve both got flaws and IT DOES NOT REALLY MATTER in the whole scheme of things.If it was just you and Tony discussing your disagreement as you always used to, without the agitators fanning the flames, this could be sorted - at least to agree to disagree.
It's a shame some people don't realise that this is not a competition or a battle of wits. It's all about a difference of opinion which sometimes can lead to animosity, as in this case. IMO this particular instance was six of one and half dozen of the other, maybe on occasions it's good idea to just agree to disagree before it gets too acrimonious.Unfortunately, it would appear that quite a few of the members on JH who were kicked out because they were suspected and/or proved to be trolls, are using this blog to get their revenge. As you say, the place is attracting the wrong calibre who are using it for their own agenda, exactly like JH's forum is being accused of doing.Par for the course I fear. You get to the stage where you don't know who's genuine and who's false. Such a pity!
Woofer, you are a good person and I can see you are trying to be fair. There are many good people on the JH forum, which is why I stayed so long. I cannot begin to tell you how hard it has been to keep my trap shut in order to remain there. On the thread that got me banned, there are pages and pages of posts taunting me, baiting me, whatever you want to call it, there was even one from Sharon! In the post prior to my response Plebgate accused me of stirring it up for Tony. My response to Plebgate 'I will reply in Members Lounge, if I can be arsed' was the first post I had made on that thread in quite some time. I wasn't the one talking about the Smiths, and I wasn't warned once, let alone on numerous occasions!But all in the past now. I've moved on. I'm now free to post without dancing around the feelings of the overly sensitive 'pass the smelling salts' maiden aunts who faint at the slip of an apostrophe or the use of an unauthorised pronoun - I was reprimanded for using the word 'we'. Having been sacked many times (I always used to go into jobs enthusiastically, but then I would get bored and start a revolution or a hostile takeover), so I know when a company wants you out. We will pay you a month's salary if you never return is another clue. One company I worked for had the very timid secretary from personnel follow me around with a clip board to see what time I arrived, left, chatted to other people, dossed around the coffee machine. etc, It amused me to hide around the corner and jump out on her and say Boo, which didn't really help my case, as I did indeed get the inevitable call to Room 7. It was on the cards Woofer. Even if I had accepted the one week ban, I would never have been able to return and abide by the rule that I cannot discuss the Smith family evidence, or anything else they deem appropriate. It dawned on me today, I'm a grown up, why the hell am I allowing other people to censor me! Anyway, apologies, I'm grumpy, v. tired and on a strict superfood and exercise diet. Dancing around with Jane Fonda relieves much stress!
Rosalinda 'Cristobell' Hutton says:"On the thread that got me banned".You were not banned, you were suspended for one week.
The incredibly stupid woof... still hasn't got it - fucking unbelievable after all this farcical !Holding bell's hand, massaging her ego and egging her on is just giving her a false sense of self importance. Remember this is not about anyone, it's about MBM.Blaming others and refusing to see bell was suicidal when she launched her crusade against TB doesn't help her either. CB turned this into a warfare against TB. Smiths became just a catalyst DD bell's used as convenient excuse to run the man down. Bell escalated the battle of wits to her war against TB. Got it yet woof... - wake up and smell the coffee man! You are slow.Stroking Bell is flaming you hypocrite but you are too thick to see it even when things are staring in your face.Hell will freeze over before TB and ding dong bell call it truce. Not when TB is committed to get JFM, like him or hate him that is of no relevance, whereas all that Bell ever craved for is to win the argument.When that was no where in sight she played dirty tactic by casting aspersion on the man. The debate is about the data not about the man or bashing the man. DD Bell fails to see that when she turned this into her imaginary war against the man and refused to relent even after her battle against the man was lost. No wonder JH discerning members got fed up with her war of martyrdom.It's not about her or TB. Unfortunately Bell got too giddy with her own self importance that she sidelined Madeleine. Those against TB abetted her, gave her a big hat, one that she wore parading her hugh ego around while continuing to denigrate the man, playing to her audience's delight , lapping up the applause forgetting Madeleine is the common goal. It's a crying shame her crave for attention got bigger than the common goal when she made herself the goal. Discerning people recognise TB's strengths and weaknesses but they also saw through Bell and her need to feed her superfluous ego is not helping common goal.An amicable truce entails one side surrendering and every intelligent JH member can see that is never go to happen, not between TB and Bell, not in a million year. Woof...is misguided if he thinks it is about polite discourse without objective from each side. Ask whose objective is going to be long lasting. Which side is going to continue to pursue JFM writing to authorities when need arises and which side is just shooting off gob without regard for common goal.Mod posted up a general warning asking members to post on relevant threat. Bell initiated a topic that took the thread off course - go figure. It's blatantly obvious she was lying and evading responsibility when she said she was never warned.
Ah, you call me Bell throughout, so you have followed me from the old AOL boards. Err, I wasn't suicidal when I replied to my banning from JH. Strange you should mention it though, because you lot were always trying to push me suicide, particularly when I lost my mother and was at my lowest. This incident occurred after many months of diet, exercise and taking positive steps to restore my health (I have lost over 3 stone!) and I am stronger now than I have been for years. And my head is much, much clearer. Unfortunately for Tony and indeed yourself, your chances of bullying me now, are down to zilch.I laugh at you because I see the projection. You hate me because I am not bound by the same codes and conventions that you are, its yourselves and your own lives you hate. You have to hate something, so you focus on me because I choose to live my life outside the box, I chose the Road Less Travelled.Instead of eating yourself up with hatred for me, why don't you sort your own lives out, you will feel much better for it.
Woofer here again. P.S. Remember a lot of these agitators are not just from proMacs, there will be others from the pro Barrymore, the pro Bromley and I suspect a few paedos along the way - in fact anyone who does not like him fighting for justice.
Woofer why do apologise to Bennett every time you disagree with him.Maybe Cristobell has had enough of kowtowing to the this nut job.You should follow her lead rather than give her a sanctamonius lecture.
I think you are a bit misguided Woofer. The polite discourse you refer to was Christobel keeping a cool rational head in the face of a completely irrational man with frankly lunatic theories that he refuses to budge on. I am surprised she kept trying so long. I dont suppose any of that would matter if he werent in a position of (abusive) power in that forum. On a level playing field she wipes the floor with him. Read this blog and know that it has nothing to do with posting on the wrong threads, it is about power, control and free speech.
Never be pushed off a forum because someone has a different opinion,who is the winner here?
It's a shame some people don't realise that this is not a competition or a battle of wits. It's all about a difference of opinion which sometimes can lead to animosity, as in this case. IMO this particular instance was six of one and half dozen of the other, maybe on occasions it's good idea to just agree to disagree before it gets too acrimonious.Unfortunately, it would appear that quite a few of the members on JH who were kicked out because they were suspected and/or proved to be trolls, are using this blog to get their revenge. As you say, the place is attracting the wrong calibre who are using it for their own agenda, exactly like JH's forum is being accused of doing.Par for the course I fear. You get to the stage where you don't know who's genuine and who's false. Such a pity!---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Your so right, this definately aint a competition....You said its about a difference of opinion that leads to animosity.....In my eyes Tony spoke his opinion, and Cristobell still suffered the animosity (double edged as fuck)In your opinion, this PARTICULAR instance was six of one and half a dozen of the other.....I think you could be right there!!! Tony had the six, and he tried to take the other half of the dozen (Im getting there)Maybe on occasions its just good to agree to disagree......Yes Cristobell :) You should just roll over and take TONYS accusations. It had to be you that wrote that email, because TONY was ON HOLIDAY (He dont do internet on the IOW)Lets talk about the members that got kicked of JH......I had no choice or voice. I sussed that site out many moons ago, but I was soon thrown away because I questioned the site.....I had to make aliases to get back in and try to inform.....BANNED.BANNED.BANNED.....Do you see it yet ?I put my name to my posts.....I am ChillyHeat, I am genuine and I am not false....But yes....It is a pity it got like this.....Blame Tony...Simple
Ah the rabble-rouser, my reference to you that Cristobell has declined to approve of posting.".....I had to make aliases to get back in and try to inform....." ???"I put my name to my posts.....I am ChillyHeat, I am genuine and I am not false" ???So tell me oh wise one, in what way did you "question the site"?
I tell you what, I read posts like yours and think thank God I'm not there any more!
Now go and look at my posts of why I introduced the Common Purpose and the Fabian Society many months ago.... :)CH
Why oh wise one? You haven't answered my question, in what way did you "question the site"? You have admitted that you are neither genuine nor true by your claim to possessing alternative identities.If you thank god that you are there no more, then why are you muck stirring? Cristobell is a drama queen, she has deliberately created a rift in order to destroy Jill Havern's forum, only because she's got issues with Tony Bennett.She is clearly using people like you to further her cause, More fool you if you don't mind being the instrument of puppetry.
You attribute a lot of power to Cristobel and her ability to destroy the JH forum! Don't worry I am sure Tone and his minions will be talking to themselves till the Macs are in jail and way beyond. Meanwhile the glorious free thinkers will gather wherever and whenever it suits them.
Ha ha Chillyheat, my oldest son has been chatting with me from Bali, Hong Kong and China over the past few weeks - who knew Isle of Wight was so out of touch!Kudos to you and those who realised what was going on CH, I thought it was nothing more sinister than the forum host appeasing a grumpy old man. I desperately wanted to be in the forum until the bitter end, there are some terrific posters on there, but when Tony's loony theories went mainstream via the Richplanet videos, it became untenable.
Ah the rabble-rouser, my reference to you that Cristobell has declined to approve of posting.Hmm....How were you informed that your post was declined ?
All you're going to end up with are trolls and a sprinkling of well meaning forim members. I see that you are truly unbound now and able yo post Fuck and Kiss my arse which reveals your true character. A victory?
I'll see if I can find a smelling salts gadget for the easily offended. :)
Christobel, you don't do yourself any favors writing things such as you did in a reply to Woofer"Having been sacked many times (I always used to go into jobs enthusiastically, but then I would get bored and start a revolution or a hostile takeover), so I know when a company wants you out. We will pay you a month's salary if you never return is another clue. One company I worked for had the very timid secretary from personnel follow me around with a clip board to see what time I arrived, left, chatted to other people, dossed around the coffee machine. etc, It amused me to hide around the corner and jump out on her and say Boo, which didn't really help my case, as I did indeed get the inevitable call to Room 7."This is your own professed psychological profile.
Our society dictates that getting the sack should leave us filled with shame and remorse. The fault lies entirely the 'sackee' who wasn't up to the job and had 'character' faults etc, etc, However, thousands, if not millions, get sacked by malevolent, bullying bosses because their face doesn't fit or a malicious colleague has a grudge against them. Most often it is because they have the audacity to think for themselves and question the ridiculous.In case you haven't realised, I am non conformist, conforming to other people's rules and regulations does not sit well with me, especially when those R&Rs are just plain stupid.I laugh now at past confrontations, and I thank all the Gods there may be that I didn't allow anyone the power to turn me into a non thinking automaton wage slave. If challenging authority (anyones) makes me a bad person, then so be it, I follow my own moral guidelines and I don't obey rules I do not agree with.
Some people are free thinkers and therefore better off self employed
TB received a report of a school science project in which A. Smith was a team member. It was about the science of baby holding. TB immediately decided this was the proof that she had lied and that her lying had preyed on her mind so much her conscience needed relief by writing about it.He states that "her dissertation DID reveal, of course, was that the whole subject of the Smiths sighting and her role in it was still preying on her mind three or four years later" (it was less than 2 years but thats Tony, never bother with a fact).This was and is an unfounded and a disgusting slur against a 13/14 year old girl, at the time of her project and remains so now.Some CMOMM members left in disgust, others were banned, those remaining seem to condone his behaviour. The story of Madeleine is about the value, the dignity and worth, we place on the life of a child. Why then Mr Bennett and members of CMOMM do you think its right to trash the life of another child, 13/14 at the time of her project and now a young woman?Many would consider this campaign of denigration against A. Smith a form of bullying, mental child abuse, as she was 12/14 at the time of the events and malicious communication. Freedom of expression is one thing, vicious, pernicious innuendo based on one mans inane ramblings, is quite another. It needs to stop CMOMM members!Cristobell, be proud of your beliefs and values, they cannot win when people stand up and be counted.
Wow! What a hornet's nest has been whipped up by TB and that forum. Wearing my banned badge with pride, I now reflect on how much it changed over the time that I was a member. When I first joined there were some really good threads and debates. And some great posters. Was the turning point the Crimewatch reconstruction I wonder? Is that when TB started his 'Smithman' crusade? A lot of people responded to that programme, some of them Luz locals and guests at the OC that week. So they would have been vital eye-witnesses. Maybe Gerry really was forced to carry a child at 10pm? One of my theories is that the whole thing was a giant media stunt but that someone or several people pulled out at the last minute after they became aware that all was not what it seemed. So that meant that the Mcs and Tapas had to do some last minute panic staging at around 10pm. Hence their insistence that Jane Tanner saw 'the abductor' at 9.15pm and he may have been hiding in the apartment at the time of Gerry's check at 9.05pm They were desperate to 'shift the action' to a time earlier than 10pm. Possibly to the time that the (staged, faked) abduction was supposed to have happened - which was 9.15pm - but didn't happen either because someone or several people pulled out or because there was a deliberate sabotage for whatever reason. I am convinced that TM got 'landed' in it at the very last minute. That's why they made such a mess of their witness statements. Plus eye-witnesses talk of commotion about a missing child as early as 9.15pm. Which is clearly impossible if it is true that Kate did not discover Madeleine missing until 10pm.As Robert Murat stated: it was the world's biggest c***-up. Yes indeed. Thank you for allowing a platform for those of us who were banned, Cristobell. I had no idea we were such a large club!