Friday, 18 February 2011

Blogeditorial Decision on the "Maddie McCann Case"



We, the Bronte-Cohen Sisters, have decided that as of today, this blog will NOT publicise here, or be distracted by, the lies repeatedly told by the various UK Tabloids.

We may, however, quote them, whenever we think adequate to do so, in order to help prove what really happened to Maddie McCann.

107 comments:

  1. Quite agree with you - what the papers especially The Sun publishes is pure fantasy and has only one purpose to give the McCanns more publicity.
    I admire your analytical minds and your attention to detail in solving this case.
    Justice for Maddie.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A breath of fresh air that we can read information on this blog that helps clear up falsehood, lies and hidden agenda.

    The factual information is there but is being ignored and downplayed because the hype sells newspapers and makes money. The 'journalists' must be under pressure to meet targets, as in every business, to keep their jobs and help their boss make mega bucks.

    Good decision.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good decision. Per contrary, in all papers I will ask people to visit your Blog Textusa and Joana Morais Blog. for accurate information. Let's do the opposite the Mccann's and their tabloids supportters want- use their spin to advertise accurate sources for accurate information.
    Their lies will work against them, no matter if the comments were moderated in the Sun. Some other papers will repeat Sun lies and will accept our comments.
    The game is over Mccann's.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The tabloids are full of utter crap. But no worse than your barking mad theories, insane woman.

    I love the way you dismiss all the witness testimony placing the McCanns and their friends in the Tapas restaurant in favour of your own demented theory.

    Why can't you state that you don't believe she was abducted - and let's face it, who does? - without replacing it with something even more preposterous?

    Still, I see your loyal band of brain donors and simpletons are still lapping it up. I have to hand it to you, Textusa. You attract the stupid the way a magnet attracts iron filings.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anon
    Feb 18, 2011 9:43:00 PM

    Do feel free to list ALL the witnesses which we've dimissed that have placed the "McCanns and their friends in the Tapas restaurant".

    We've been careful to consubstanciate with the respective testimonies all our statements, deductions and opinions, but then again, we may have overlooked some, and we certainly do not wish to mislead anyone.

    But, as you know, one thing is what one says, and another, completely different, is what the other party listens from one's said words. For example, you think you're insulting me and our readers, but your rudeness is just taken as a desperate cry, that it is, of a losing cause.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Don't be ridiculous, Textusa

    At least four Tapas employees gave witness testimory stating that the McCanns dined there on 3rd May, as did Steven Carpenter, a fellow holidaymaker. Are you seriously suggesting that all these people have conspired together, with the McCanns and their friends to give false testimony?


    Insane

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Insane
    Feb 18, 2011 10:15:00 PM

    Yes, we are. And we know that you know we are. Repeating your fake ignorance will get you nowhere here.

    Sorry, I did forget to say just now that there ARE some testimonies that we haven't referred to yet, but we're not done with the subject, are we?

    Don't answer, we know you know we aren't.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anon @ 9.43

    What exactly is your problem? If Textusa has 'got something wrong' could you please tell us BRAIN DONORS what it is?

    I would love to hear your explanation of events. If you are getting so wound up by what is written on this blog, why do you read it? If you think it's nonsense, why don't you smile to yourself and enjoy the amusement?
    Something makes you write rude, aggressive posts very reminiscent of the dead pro McCann blogs. Although I have to say your rudeness is as nowhere near as bad as those posters on places like the now dead Chaosraptor blog.

    I would guess you have an invested interest so why don't you be honest and say what is it is that is said here unnerving you? It must be assumed that some facts have been presented here in an accessible way without people having to search through the police files, that some were hoping would be missed.

    I'm making a guess I know why this blog is upsetting you but unless you state your evidence and opinion then it will remain just that, a guess!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Looks like the cages of the pro McCann lobby have been rattled again.
    Well done Tex on your truthful blog.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anon. @ 9:43,

    You guy, came back. Nothing is more insane then your insannity. If you don't like some theories don't read them.
    Interesting why some people tend to call theories to what was proved to be facts. The truth is hard to digest, specially if you are connected in some way, with lies or the perverting of justice.
    Did you noticed? even your insults and your insannity got published here. Democracy my dear. In the Rubbish papers, comments were moderated and only got published the ones who support their marketing. No comments in the SUN, means 100% ANTI, AGAINST the wonderful pair of liars and their spin machine.
    Mccann's Martin Luther King did not help them sell their book/ theory. Had a contrary effect- people mock them. They become a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "You attract the stupid the way a magnet attracts iron filings."

    You are talking about yourself, 9:43.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Reading through the comments posted on web sites referring to this latest 'sighting' public opinion has turned against the McCanns, people are fed up with their lies and fabricated stories, people want to see action they want the case RE-OPENED and the McCanns fully investigated.

    This latest sighting is nothing more than another smokescreen to divert attention, and good on you Tex for saying you will not report on it, it is pure, pure, rubbish.

    Your site raises valid, truthful facts that is why I always come here.
    Well done Textusa, Sina J and May I oneday the truth will be known.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Insane and... Naïve, 9:43; 10:15

    what will surprise me is one of the Tapas workers stating against the Mccann's.
    Now you show your skills. PDL is a small town in Algarve. April/May is a low season. Most of the hotels were empty, closed at this time because there is no good weather/reason to do what the Algarve is famous for- beach and sports under sunny days. Do you believe that the OC who was opened (god knows for what) was running all the restaurants like in hot August? The all May 3 evening was a farcee and just could be sustained by few people, connected with same place(restaurant) lying. Why there is no statements from the Millennium workers? The only restaurant that was really opened for free and part of the holidays pack? At least those workers could just say that the Mccann's were not there that night. This will lead the police to officially interrogate all the guests ( a step the Mccann's and the resort avoided in many ways). I believe, PJ knows exactly that the Tapas issue was a farce. They interrogate all guests and neighbors of the Resort. A torment for you and your friends, because this is part of the closed files. This is part of the PART THE MCCANN'S DID NOT KNOW- "WHAT THE POLICE KNOWS..."
    For more then 3 years, your friends tried hard, in many ways, to access the closed files. Marcelino Broken Tooth was just one more try. Wonder why even the Home Office excused himself with "portuguese investigation" to refuse Mccann's attempt.
    Exercise your brain, my dear. Reading will make your cell brains to work( if you had some) and will save your third age by protecting you from a serious disease, Alzheimer.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Unpublished comment #1 from Insane
    “You see, Textusa, this is why people laugh at you, your silly drawings, your breathtaking ignorance and your merry band of menopausal misfits.
    You have no response to the simple plain fact that both Tapas staff and independent witnesses placed the McCanns in the Tapas bar that night.
    So answer one simple question - are you suggesting that they have all conspired together to lie and cover up for the McCanns - yes or no?“

    *******

    Unpublished comment #2 from Insane
    “Come on Textusa - too scared to publish ALL my posts? As usual you will fail to publish the ones for which you have no answer
    You were asked a direct question. Too cowardly to answer it ?”

    *******

    Unpublished comment #3 from Insane
    “Anons at 9.43 and 10.45
    You show your utter stupidity when you surmise that I am a ''pro''
    Are you both really so stupid that you believe Textusa when she tells you there never were any tapas dinners?
    In which case you must also believe that members of staff conspired with unconnected holidaymakers and the McCanns and all their friends to lie in their statements.
    And if you honestly believe that, you need help “

    *******

    First, these types of comments attempt to have the same effect as the “news” published by the UK Tabloids, and that is to create doubt by trying to transform certainties into doubtful information, This is done by repeatedly questioning the veracity of inconvenient facts already verified and proved, and, through this distraction, achieving both the interruption of the natural flux of information put out by the author as well as the disruption of the line of thought of the reader.

    Notice the ABSOLUTE similarity between the following questions:
    Question #1:
    “Are you seriously suggesting that all these people have conspired together, with the McCanns and their friends to give false testimony?”
    Question #2:
    So answer one simple question - are you suggesting that they have all conspired together to lie and cover up for the McCanns - yes or no?“

    Question #1 was answered in clear, precise and concise terms: “Yes, we are.”

    So why is Question #2 even asked if it had already been answered in Question #1’s answer?

    For repetition’s sake, and to wiggle in an unpleasant aggressiveness that seeks to drive readers away:

    “You were asked a direct question. Too cowardly to answer it ?”. How can a civilized person respond to a question that doesn’t want to be answered? One can’t.

    Of course, then our friend Insane goes into the usual dribble of saying (in needlessly unpleasant, rude and aggressive terms) that s/he is not a “pro”.

    Besides the word “pro” being used without clarifying what or whom is it supportive of (this blog, for example, assumes itself as being pro-justice) one assumes that Insane wishes to use the terminology as “pro-McCann”. That is, s/he alleges not to be a pro-McCann.

    Dear Insane, we’ve long understood that. You hate the McCanns, and reasonably so, more than you hate this blog. The desperation you transpire in attempting to keep out the OC Guests, the OC Staff and some Expats resident in the PdL area, from all the mess created by those particular 9 people, is quite evident, so, I truly believe you when you say you’re not a “pro”.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Has 'Yawn' returned as 'Insane' or is 'Insane' truly insane?

    Great decision Tex not following in tabloids footsteps.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I Insane or 9:43,

    In Fact and speaking only from my point of view, I don't believe you are a PRO. I believe YOU ARE ONE OF THE TAPAS 10. Just a guy directly involved in the facts that hapenned on the later afternnon/early evening of May 3 in PDL, could have a reaction like yours.
    Your posts did not show stupidity. They go far, they show desperation, worries. And it is amazing to see that even you confessed the attempt to pervert justice, represented in all articles published by the SUN, regarding Madeleine.
    Keep posting my dear. I'm delated with your threats against Textusa. She shows courage, inteligence and tennacity. You show pain, cowardy, desperation.
    What you know, what you concealed will hunt you trough all your life. A Karma from what no any of your friends could escape.
    regarding me, as a regular reader of that Blog, I will keep my eyes open, looking to where the truth seems to be coming. There is no perfect crimes, and Madeleine as a real child could not disappeared leaving no traces. What the police disclosed to public eyes, was an infime part of what the police knows and was disclosed with exactly propose of raising in the public eyes, active discussions. Contrary to what you want the public to believe, PJ is a very competent and inteligent police. We just follow the strings they untide for us. Those strings are destroying your life my dear. Any day that passes, you feel the lost of the plot. The sky will fall over all of you, spin guys, who became deliberately or not, part of the cover-up. YOU ARE ONE OF THEM. DON'T TRY TO FOOL US WITH A PERVERSE INSINUATION OF BEING A PRO.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Textusa, I’m pleased you posted all the comments to us brain donors from insane. Now that really is freedom of speech, although s/he doesn’t offer any information and tries to discredit the facts revealed on the blog. The facts have always been there and posters find them and present them.
    I don’t know why insane says you are scared to publish his posts, it’s obvious why you would choose not to because they don’t add anything to the discussion or offer information by highlighting what facts he gas discovered, it’s fire just fighting. Quite apart from them being rude and juvenile in tone.

    I will assume insane is a man because he uses an insult aimed at women. Misogynist?
    But why go to such trouble to insist he does not support the McCanns? Who is he hoping to protect and why?

    After reading the statements of the Tapas staff I’m not convinced the Tapas restaurant was open for dinner. Surely the name also implies they served Tapas food which we all know is lots of small dishes served with drinks. That would explain only one chef and one kitchen assistant and waiters that have time to take 30 minute breaks.

    Insane also said independent witnesses place the T9 in the Tapas restaurant but does not say who these witnesses are so we can re-read their statements. There is no mention of the people who were supposed to be there but have been expunged from the records. Please provide!

    There is a moral duty for anyone who knows anything to come forward to provide information. Justice should be the motivator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anon @ 9.30

    Well said!

    Insane posing as someone who does not support the McCanns is irrelevant. It is justice he should be supporting. It does look very much like he is involved and is trying to protect either himself, someone close to him OR he is being paid to protect the interests of someone.

    He called Textusa scared to respond but it is him who is scared and will not answer why he is so upset by what is said here or tell what he knows.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ah - as usual, you were initially too cowardly and dishonest to publish my posts asking you a direct question, but too weak-willed to be capable of resisting when challenged.

    So leaving all the abuse aside, what you have actually confirmed amongst all this nonsensical verbiage is that you seriously contend that all the people - holidaymakers and staff alike - who gave statements to the police that they had seen the Tapas group in the Tapas bar were lying.

    Your ridiculous contention being that they did so, for whatever reason, to assist the McCanns in covering up what happened to Madeleine.

    You believe that people who were complete strangers to the McCanns and their friends LIED for them, and that there never were any Tapas dinners - that is what you contend, isn't it?

    And you have the cheek to accuse the tabloids of making stuff up. They do, of course, but not to the extent which you do.

    So then - show of hands.

    How many of you simpletons agree with her? Anyone got the courage to say ''You know, Tex, that does seem a little unlikely to me, too. Maybe you have got it wrong''

    Or are you all too much like sheep, with no ability to think for yourself?

    (Let's see if you publish that, Textusa)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh by the way, for the benefit of Anon at 9.43, and all the rest of you who are too lazy or too unprincipled to actually bother reading the files, but merely prefer to believe the distilled shite which Textusa tells you, the Tapas were placed in the Tapas bar that night by a holidaymaker called STEPHEN CARPENTER, and by Tapas staff including JOAQUIM JOSE MORIERA BAPTISTA, JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS, STARIKOVA VITORINO, RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA......

    Other members of staff and other holidaymakers place them there on other evenings.

    But Textusa tells you none of the Tapas dinners ever happened and therefore all these people are lying.

    And you are so dim, you actually believe her. Now go and read the statements yourselves and stop being so bone idle.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bom dia !

    Já nem sei se estes comentários vindos do P.S. (de Portugal) ou de outros P.Silva de outros lados, serão " liberdade de expressão "......

    Admiro Text. porque coloca os ditos; os quais eu considero serem de absoluta falta de educação e de incrível falta de nível.

    Que paciência tem, Text !

    Aos mal educados e violentos só posso ignorar. Mas isto é a minha opção.

    "Parecem bandos de pardais à solta
    Os putos, os putos
    São como índios, capitães da malta
    Os putos, os putos
    Mas quando a tarde cai
    Vai-se a revolta
    Sentam-se ao colo do pai
    É a ternura que volta
    E ouvem-no a falar do homem novo
    São os putos deste povo
    A aprenderem a ser homens.

    Que se sentem, os mal educados, ao colo do pai e aprendam a ser homens. Dignos!

    Mais uma vez gabo a Sua paciência,Text! E, obrigada por todos os posts da Equipa daqui.

    MC

    ReplyDelete
  22. Insane is involved. I could be wrong but just a quick look on the trafic on that blog, more or less at the time he/she posted showed Leicester.
    He/she knows what he/she wanted to discredit.
    Who use to visite the Algarve at low season knows- the towns are empty. Most hotels and restaurants are closed. No way for the OC to have 2 restaurants openned at same time to target the same clients. Even because May 3 was a week day. One more reason for the Tapas to be closed. The Millenium was the restaurant to serve the clients.
    They are getting desperate because we are exposing the real situation to the world.
    I use to go to Vilamoura for Christmas/New year. Vilamoura is one of the towns with more people and use to be almost empty and with most of the restaurants closed, even at New Year. Most of the employers are "sazonal", like the clients. No way for a Resort like the OC to employ people at full time during a low season. The workers who testify puting the Mccann's in the Tapas on May 3, were forced to lie. They become part of the cover-up. Worried now because a lie cannot survive forever. Wonder if that guys were the ones who lost the jobs. I believe not. Who lost the job had nothing to do with Madeleine. Those need to be around, where they could be controlled. What make the Mccann's coming back to PDL, a town where they know are not welcomed?
    I'm using the magnets, dear insane, to connect facts and facts never lie and cannot be overtaked.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Tex,
    I think its great that we are not discussing the 'tabloids' because they are full of rubbish and misinformation.

    I also think that putting 'insanes' comments on here shows how open minded and truthful your blog is - unlike the media websites who pick and chose which comments to post, but he is also distracting us and that I feel is his sole purpose.

    I also notice he only seems to have appeared since you mention the Tapas bar dinner arrangements, so following through on what we were previously discussing it looks as if you have hit a 'raw nerve' with somebody and the Tapas dinner never happened at all.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The comments that 'Insane' makes definitely come from somebody around the McCann age group if we analyse them, not a younger person - an older person would show more restraint and possibly respect.

    They are annoyed you are not following the tabloid fairystories, or perhaps its something else you may have mentioned such as the 'fake' dinner outside the Tapas out of season in the cold and dark.
    I read in another article that the lighting was 'amber lighting' in the street, so Jane Tanner could not have possibly seen a child wearing pink - that lighting makes everything appear amber.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Insane - If you disagree with the misinformationthe mccanns spread and see the injustice to a 3 year old as we do why not be constructive and join our discussions as Tex has mentioned this is a truthful blog based on facts and she does a lot of research and we value her opinions, so please do not be insulting there is far to much hatred in the world already.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Insane

    Your desperation is so panicked filled that you don't even realize that you're shooting yourself in your own foot. Your justifications for the people you say prove Textusa is wrong, are the same you use to say you don't believe there wasn't an abduction. According to you STEPHEN CARPENTER, JOAQUIM JOSE MORIERA BAPTISTA, JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS, STARIKOVA VITORINO and RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRAT say that the McCanns were at Tapas, and so prove that they were there. On the other hand, GERRY MCCANN, KATE MCCANN, DAVID PAYNE, FIONA PAYNE... and the other Tapas lot say that there was an abduction and YOU don't believe them. Why? Why do you believe some lie, while believe that others don't? And about people lying for the McCanns, they've been so many, and from so many places that it's a ridiculous argument you present to contradict Textusa. If anything, it's having the opposite effect. Textusa's finger has hit a sore, and you're crying in pain. Do feel free to call me stupid or whatever your scared mind may think of. I only wear hats that fit me.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Yep - you really are all that stupid. Astonishing, who knew?

    Incidentally, the use of the word ''Insane'' was a commentary on Textusa's state of mind, not a nom-de-plume.

    Massively amused by your desperate attempts to assign me to the Tapas group. Time for a few home truths, I think

    Of all the Anti-McCann sites, this is the one which achieves the most ridicule on other anti-sites and for a very good reason - you are all so breathtakingly stupid. Other Antis despise this site, Textusa and all you limp-brained hangers-on because putting it quite simply, you give other antis a very bad name.

    You clearly are so enthralled by Textusa that you are completely unable to see that she is like Harpic. Clean around the bend.

    So no. I'm not a McCann or one of their friends. I have no connection with them, or Leicester for that matter. I do not believe the abduction fiction for a moment, never have. I hold the McCanns entirely responsible for the loss of their daughter.

    I said this once before - if you really want progress in finding out what happened to Madeleine, Textusa, do as I invited you to do once before. Pour a pint of water into your PC and put yourself out of action - you are the best friend the McCanns have on the internet.

    The saddest irony is that there never was any need for you to make up elaborate scenarios - the reality is horrendous enough.

    In the course of developing your theories, you have turned your insanity upon practically everyone. You have called them all liars - the witnesses in the Tapas bar, other holidaymakers, priests, Mrs Fenn.

    The one question you have never answered is WHY?

    Why would all those people with no previous connection with the McCanns lie for them - and to what result?

    I don't believe a single one of you fuckwits on here has actually bothered reading those statements, so I suggest you do so and then come back here with an explanation as to why they would lie

    In the meantime, I shall return to my peaceful little anti site where we don't tolerate morons like Textusa, and we don't publish ''essence of bullshit'' theories, created by someone who has forgotten to take her medication again.

    I shall leave you to your pro-McCann agenda, Textusa. I must admit you have done a good job of getting these cretins to boost support for the Mc's, all the while thinking they are doing the opposite. I can see why you chase off the brighter ones PDQ. Heaven forbid any of them should cotton on to what you're doing.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anon at 7.31

    Oh for God's sake, no-one can be as stupid as you pretend to be, surely?

    For starters, the Tapas group do not ''say'' there was an abduction. It may be a conclusion they ascribe to, but none of them claimed to have witnessed an abduction, not even Jane Tanner actually claims to have witnessed Madeleine being abducted. There is no evidence to support an abduction.

    However, all the witnesses I listed stated that the McCanns and their friends took dinner in the Tapas bar that night BECAUSE THEY SAW THEM THERE.There is other evidence to support the fact that they were there

    The only person who maintains they are all lying, is Textusa, who not only maintains that they were not there that night, but that they were never there on any night. You would believe whatever she says, it appears

    What evidence is there that any of them lied? And what reason would they have to lie?

    Ever think that maybe the person lying to you is Textusa?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Insane,

    Before you leave, could you please leave us a link to your "peaceful little anti site where we don't tolerate morons like Textusa, and we don't publish "essence of bullshit" theories"?

    Don't worry, it's not for me, it's for those that you may enlightened, and may now wish to read what you have to say, without me hindering you.

    Thank you

    ReplyDelete
  30. Certainly not, Textusa. As I said, it's a site where we don't tolerate your sort, and we certainly wouldn't tolerate any of your idiot friends.


    We're choosy like that

    ReplyDelete
  31. ... "you seriously contend that all the people - holidaymakers and staff alike - who gave statements to the police that they had seen the Tapas group in the Tapas bar were lying......the Tapas were placed in the Tapas bar that night by a holidaymaker called STEPHEN CARPENTER, and by Tapas staff including JOAQUIM JOSE MORIERA BAPTISTA, JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS, STARIKOVA VITORINO, RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA....."


    Ah, Ah, Insane. You could not be better. Look at how many you resumed your "...all the people - holidaymakers and staff alike - who gave statements to the police..."? - 5 guys!!!! What a number. was that the answer that you are looking for? 5 manipulated and controlled guys that just become relevant because they lied in a crime that according with an investigation done by the top police of two counries, arrived to the conclusion that the girl most probably died in the 5A and no signs of any stranger involved on the situation. What a job, your posts. You definnetly knows a lot abou the case and your knowledge seems not coming from the PJ files but from what you experienced in loccus.
    There was no way to have that dinner on that night. Imagine, 4 workers allocated to a single restaurant in a week night to serve a bunch of British neglects that left their childs babysitting hemselves while they are going to spend money in a dinner already availabe for free at another resaurant? NO WAY. The dinner was a farce to suit the negligence. And the negligence was a farce to suit the abduction. Exactly like all the sights of Madeleine and egg mans all over the world. Always, one farce to suit another one. The last on the Sun, with Marcelino Italiano was so fake as others... another farce to suit the marketing that the paper and the Mccann's have to do to sell their packet of tree-lies. Now targeting the pockets of the americans and smelling the dollars.
    Keep posting insane. You are one of them. Very worried with what is being exposed here and in another blogs.
    Mccann's and their machine destroyed their own story, simple because was not possible. They cannot manipulate the pace of the time and keep in place the actors tha were unsuitable for it.

    Textusa, I found a strange behaviour on your comments window and my antivirus signalise a virus.
    They are really scared and trying to distract.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anon at 8.02

    My knowledge of the case comes from the PJ files.

    Your ignorance of the case arises from your failure to read them. And the natural advantage you have from being incredibly dim.

    I see you have still failed to indicate a single reason why all these people would lie.

    Have you read any of those statements?

    ReplyDelete
  33. come on Insane, your little site is in fact a merchandising where posters, mobile screens and travel packs, a long with tshirts advertised as "high quality cotton" could be brought if we agree to pay. It's called Findmadeleine and you are not leaving. You are just going to fade a little because you have no arguments to contradict what we are exposing. Bite your nails, call us as many names as you like, you cannot change facts. You trow yourself exactely in the middle of the fire... If you are not one of the Tapas, then you are connected with Mitchell or with mccann's lawyers.

    "So no. I'm not a McCann or one of their friends. I have no connection with them, or Leicester for that matter..." THEN, IN WHICH MATTER ARE YOU CONNECTED WITH THEM?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anon@ 8.28

    Oh dear. Another cerebrally challenged one

    I have no connection to the McCanns, their site, any of their friends, supporters or legal team

    You are not exposing anything here, except your need for heavy duty medication. You reveal no facts, only fairy stories.

    You have a hidden agenda - or at least are part of Textusa's hidden agenda - to actively help the McCanns by posting the most ridiculous, laughable nonsense you can possibly dream up.

    Next to Textusa, even Jayne Tanner seems clear-headed, logical and trustworthy.

    And that really is saying something

    Now - not one of you has confirmed that you have read any of those statements, or provided any reason to explain why all those people would have conspired together to lie.

    So how about you address that?

    Except that you can't, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Ah! Ah! Insane,

    You know why they lied... IMAGE, REPUTATION, AND THE DEATH OF A LITTLE GIRL WHICH AUTOPSY HAD TO BE AVOIDED.
    I read all the files and much more but I never read anywhere that:
    "The saddest irony is that there never was any need for you to make up elaborate scenarios - the reality is horrendous enough."

    You are delivering to us a very important information "the reality is horrendous enough".

    See? You know why they lied and yow know why those people were choose to lie and help the Tapas sustain their absurdity.

    Predicted, you are not leaving and your insults did not annoy me. In fact I'm delighted with your treats. Here, the only one who lost controll and the plot, is you. I have nothing to fear. I don't believe on any word coming from all team Mccann in what I include their fake independent witnesses.

    Cheers from 8:02

    ReplyDelete
  36. Still not a single answer

    why would a group of complete strangers lie for a couple they didn't know? Spare me all the bullshit, just answer the question

    ReplyDelete
  37. Insane (real adequate nick!) who says they didn't know the couple? Oh, YOU say, so it must be true.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Textusa - are you really suggesting that all the staff at the Tapas bar, plus an assortment of holidaymakers all previously knew the McCanns, and all lied for them to cover up a suspicious death?

    Is that what you are honestly suggesting? Just so we can have the straightjacket ready.

    Perhaps you could then go on to explain why a group of people - the witnesses in question - who had done nothing wrong, and were not under any suspicion, would - en masse - commit a crime in order to help the McCanns?

    ReplyDelete
  39. Same question, third time.

    Insane, you have served your purpose, thank you. You're excused. Do, for once, keep your word and go back from where you came, and said you would go.

    To blog readers. Please do not understimate Insane's comments. They contain precious information. Do reread them, and abstain from the pseudo-ignorance and their voidness (altough both are elements to be considered) and extract the useful information they DO contain, and I'm not speaking about the evident despair they transpire.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  40. So, the sum total of the answers you have given is yes, you do believe all these people were involved in a conspiracy, and no, you have no explanation for why you believe this.

    In other words, a figment of your perverse and perverted imagination and another attempt to brainwash your merry band of dickheads.

    The fact that you are completely unable to justify your conclusions has not gone unnoticed, Textusa. Nor has the fact that you are, in effect, accusing at least six individuals of Conspiracy, Perjury and Attempting to Pervert the course of Justice, without any justification whatsoever.

    Still - you can always plead insanity, and offer this column as evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Insane @7:32 wrote:

    "The saddest irony is that there never was any need for you to make up elaborate scenarios - the reality is horrendous enough."

    And just what is that "horrendous reality"...? Care to enlighten us, the brain donors? DO YOU KNOW exactly what is the reality of the events that took place on that night? It seems you DO! Tell us then! What really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann on the night of the 3rd May 2007? Your words echoe those of Kate McCann outside the Lisbon Court, her outburst at a reporter who dared to ask her "inconvenient" questions:

    " I know more than you do, I was there!"

    Where you there, "Insane"...?
    I'm not a betting person, but...

    ReplyDelete
  42. I Insane, I hope you had a good night because you did not leave. How predicted you become, exactely like others, who for more then 4 years damage the prestige of real circus.

    You are one of them and you delivered last night some very important information that Pj had to add to what they already know. Or you believe that the police did not surf in the Internet?
    Something serious and close to the target (the Truth) is being discussed here and make you and others, from your group, to lost the mind and react. You have done more damage on them then what you are incharged to.

    Trough your own words, we know:

    -"Other members of staff and other holidaymakers placed the Mccann's in the Tapas bar that night". ( where is that information in the disclosed files?)
    (5 Guys, is that the number that according to you we should not dismiss... their statements. They deserve a lot of credit because they are not connected with Mccann's or with each other. Ok, leaving the Carpenters aside, 4 are connected with each other and having a common spine holder, and what a holder... THE MANAGER OF THE RESORT, THE GUY WHO HAVE THE POWER TO PROVIDE THEM A JOB AND A SALARY or just drop them down and let them go enlarging the big list of unemployed people who live under the state social beneffites. And who are the Carpenters? Until now, I did not found a single strong evidence that they really exist and were in the OC. The Tapas booking list, look more like the Creche records, manipulated and made after all events to entertain the police. If we go a little deep on the PJ files, we found another interesting statement from Mrs. Wilkins ( she and her husband also deserved some accurate attention) saying that around 1 O'clock (4 May), Oldfield and the manager of the OC knocked on her door to say that a child was missing. It took some time for her and her husband to understand that they are talking about Madeleine Mccann. When she and her husband asked them if they should go out to help and search Madeleine, they answer "NO BECAUSE NOTHING COULD BE DONE". See?... When police, some guests and residents of PDL were already in the streets searching Madeleine, some guys directed connected with Mccann's were working on another frontline, trying to keep people at home, perverting the search, avoiding whatever hapenned that night to be found. But the same lady become even more interesting when later, some days after, she delivered to the Media a "5 star interview" where she said that the GNR knocked on her door on 4th morning to ask her if she saw that girl and while asking that, they show her a wrong picture of Madeleine. WAW... On that morning, the face of the girl was already front page of all newspapers in all Europe and opening the news of almost all TVs in the world, including all portuguese channels and the Sky and CNN. Most of the childs were already aware of that face and scared with a Paedo around, free to target another child. Then... for who was the message of Mrs. Wilkins and what was the propose of her words? My dear, early started the campaign against the police, and YOU KNOW IT.)
    CONT:

    ReplyDelete
  43. CONT:
    -Let me carry on with your words (Insane), "For starters, the Tapas group do not ''say'' there was an abduction. It may be a conclusion they ascribe to,... There is no evidence to support an abduction". Another waw, from my side. Then, what is the mean of the words " we let her down. They take her"- Kate Mccann. " Nothing was more... then when we found her"- Gerry Mccann
    And what is the mean of the draw Jane provide to the police showing an Egg-man carrying a child in the most uncomfortable away, wearing a pink pyjama under a street light that transforms all the colors in different shadows of yellow?- A FAKE ABDUCTION, is what you are saying dear insane. Totally agree. NOW ALL THE REST NEED TO BE ANALISED AROUND THAT SCENARIO. FACTS DELIVERED BY THE MCCANN'S AND THEIR FRIENDS, FROM MINUTE ONE UP TO NOW. Most of them planned, but always with some banana skins where they sliped, THE DETAILS. For me, those details become much more interesting then the main course. You are part of this details, always showing up when the mess hurts.
    Just an appart which is relevant for this week Mccann's Media events. First came Marcelino with his tooth problem, testing the target( the potential buyers of Kate attempt against the trees) and after come Mitchell, again in the SKY, trying to distance himself and them from the mock Marcelino. Where did I see that before? Oh my memory... was last time when Gerry was forced to fade because a New-Zealand Father and the New-Zealand police were not happy with their last fairy tale involving a real girl in a Supermarket.
    Thanks dear Insane, for your contribution. Now it's clear that the Abduction was fake and it's clear that people connected with Mccann's or with manager of the OC lied on their behalf to conceal a crime against a girl that did not deserve to be searched 2 hours after her missing alarm being raised.
    Now I really wanted o ear from you what you have to say about two issues: THE FUND and THE SWING IN THE OC on that particular week- 28 April to 3 May, 2007. Are you leaving now? Oh, I feel so sorry...

    ReplyDelete
  44. Insane,

    Thank you for defining the legal terms in which those that you protect so desperately SHOULD be accused of: "Conspiracy, Perjury and Attempting to Pervert the course of Justice".

    About your threat to sue remember not to hire Carter-Ruck. Those are busy suing those that call McCann liars, such as yourself. Or so you say, as we have no way of knowing because you don't tell us where you say it, and on what terms you say it. Like everything else, you just say it.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anon@ drivelling nonsense, above

    To quote you ''"Other members of staff and other holidaymakers placed the Mccann's in the Tapas bar that night". ( where is that information in the disclosed files?)''


    Why don't you actually go and READ the files ?

    The information which you claim does not exist is there in the files, all the statements are there for you to read, something you clearly haven't done. Please explain how your ACCUSATION that all the staff lied because they were leaned on by the management constitutes any kind of proof? It's a fairy story, written by Textusa, swallowed hook line and sinker by the mentally deficient.

    As for this:

    Quote ''And who are the Carpenters? Until now, I did not found a single strong evidence that they really exist and were in the OC.''

    Erm......... statement also in the files. If you are struggling, why don't you get someone else to find it and read it to you.

    Or perhaps you are seriously suggesting that the PJ made him up?

    Do you also believe in the Tooth Fairy? Santa Claus? The Loch Ness monster?

    There is nothing whatsoever to support Textusa's ridiculous notion, and everything to support the opposite conclusion. So you choose to ignore the ACTUAL evidence in favour of a fairy story

    Get some help. You are clearly utterly credulous and very poorly educated, especially if you can't even find those statements amongst the available sources.

    ReplyDelete
  46. ''When asked he says that he clearly recalls the appearance of the girl’s parents, he does not know their names, together with a group of English tourists who generally accompanied them, as for almost a week prior to the disappearance they would dine practically every day in the Tapas restaurant. On the occasions he saw the group dining at the restaurant he never saw the children.''

    ''When questioned, the witness says that he remembers on Thursday 3rd May, on the day of the disappearance, that the parents went to dine at the restaurant with the usual people. He cannot be precise, but the witness says that the group arrived between 20.00 and 21.00. He remembers there being about 9 people in total. He states that he received the food orders from the group.''

    ''Later, between 22.00 and 22.30, when the witness was in the kitchen, he was informed by a colleague that in the meantime a client had entered the restaurant shouting and that afterwards the whole English had left in a panic. The witness’s colleague told him that this individual had said that a child had disappeared. A few minutes later the witness noticed great agitation, with many people everywhere searching for the child.''

    ''They would arrive for dinner according to daily bookings which they did themselves at the reception, he remembers the bookings were always made for 20.30 or 21.00. This booking could be made on the same day until 16.00, it was necessary to show proof of accommodation as well as the number of persons included in the booking. He says that the group arrived in phases but no long delays occurred.''

    ReplyDelete
  47. Cont ......

    ''When asked, he said that they would normally stay at the restaurant until 23.30 – 24.00, although some of them would leave earlier, at about 23.00. They were people who showed their satisfaction with the food and would consume on average 8 bottles of wine (4 red, 4 white) between the nine of them, which he considered to be normal consumption for a group of such a number.''

    ''Referring to the day of 3rd May when Madeleine disappeared, the witness says that he was working.

    At that time, at about 22.20 – 22.30 he noticed that there was only one person sitting at the group’s table, the oldest of them and he asked her jokingly whether they had left her alone.''

    ''When asked he says that the parents and the other members of the group would arrive between 20.00 and 21.00 but that they would only begin to dine when all of them had arrived.

    When asked, he says that he remembers that it was usual during dinner for one or two members of the group to leave the table for about 10 or 15 minutes and given the fact that on various occasions he saw walkie talkies on the table, he supposed that they went to check on their children who were in their respective rooms.

    On 3rd May the witness arrived at his place of work as usual at 16.00 and that he first saw Madeleine’s parents at dinner that night at about 20.45.''

    ''Dinner would end at about 21.45, a few minutes later the witness looked at the table and saw that there was nobody there and one of his colleagues told them that all the guests had left the table in a hurry. In any case, he remembers having heard shouts from the direction of Madeleine’s parents’ apartment.''

    ''This group would dine at about 21.00/21.30 and she remembers that her colleagues called them the “Tennis Group”, as they were a very happy group.

    The group’s children did not dine with them. She remembers that on the day the child disappeared there was some confusion, with some people who left the table after ordering, one of the meals even being sent back, as someone had asked them to delay the meal for a little while.''

    ''I hadn’t realised that the Tapas bar had a take away service. At that time i didn’t know their names. At approximately half past eight, Gerry and Kate and their group of approximately ten people were already seated at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them, we spoke of tennis amongst other things, I vaguely remember that Gerry and Kate and other people from the group would leave the table in intervals (inaudible), I think it was to check on the children , but I do not remember with what frequency or how many times the people left the table to check on the children. ''

    Quotes from the statements referred to

    Textusa says they all lied

    Why?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Don't you have the balls to publish ALL my posts, Textusa?

    Scared your little friends might cotton on to what you are doing?

    Tut tut

    ReplyDelete
  49. Anon @ 9,07
    Please read Mr Peleja's statement.

    He arrived at the Tapas unannounced. unexpectedly and gives a very different version of events that night. And events happened much earlier than the waiters. say.

    This man is far more credible than the young, seasonal waiters who had so much time on their hands that night they could hang around together in the kitchen for 30 minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Insane,

    Clarence Mitchell and Dave Edgar, just to name two, who apparently didn't know the McCanns from anywhere, say that Maddie was abducted. According to you they lie. Why?

    And all you've referred above, is already confirmed in Sina J's post about the nights around the big round table, and it isn't what they say that it makes it true or a lie, it's the fact that what they say not making sense, that its evident that they lie. They just say that they were there, but don't explain why the meal was served superfast, on an inexistent BIG ROUND Table.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Oh please, spare me the ''Big round table'' nonsense

    Textusa's entire theory seems to revolve around some garbage about the table not being big enough.

    It is your choice to ignore statements from numerous individuals who all saw the McCanns and their friends dining in the Tapas, and instead substitute your barking mad theory because to Textusa and her cerebrally challenged cohort it ''Doesn't make sense''

    ReplyDelete
  52. Mr Peleja places them in the restaurant too

    ''A few minutes later, when it was around 21H20, he heard some clamour, which made him leave toward the restaurant, a few meters away, and was then informed that a child had disappeared. Given the importance of this, believed that he should be in the surroundings. At that moment, he did not leave the area of the restaurant, and did not have the opportunity to check if the vehicle mentioned before was situated in the same location;
    . Later, at around 21:40, he left the restaurant passing through the same esplanade where moments before, he had seen the same table occupied by the three couples, empty, who had left in the meanwhile various items, principally clothing. He was told by his colleagues that the child who had disappeared was a child of one of those couples; ''

    The timing is immaterial. There is always inconsistency between eyewitness testimony. If there isn't, that's when it becomes suspicious. In any case that isn't the point we are debating here

    Textusa contends that the Tapas dinners NEVER TOOK PLACE

    You clearly don't agree with her either

    ReplyDelete
  53. Today this already known computer-simulated picture of Maddie was on the 1st site of our biggest newspaper (German equivalent to the UK Sun). The text said, "US experts" had made a "new" one. Then the text said, PJ stopped searching for Maddie after a couple of weeks and closed the files. AFTER THAT the McCanns decided to to "search" for Madeleine on their own (expense) and asked for donations in order to pay private investigators. It as mentioned that the fund had 2,3 Mio. GBP in the beginning, now only 300,000 are left...
    So the newspaper lies to the ppl and the text implies, the PJ was not interested to investigate the case further, closed it too quickly THUS the poor parents started to "search" on their own and travel (campaigning) allover the world...
    When we all know they started their campaign and their fund raising the day after Maddie's disapperance already when PJ was still investigating the case.
    No mention of cadaver odeur being found in the App. or that the Mcs were suspects.
    Unfortunately you cannot place comments to that article. This is a marketing campaign for the McCann Book, nothing else. I wonder, why newspapers allover the world post this false information?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anon 9.07

    '...various occasions he saw walkie talkies on the table, he supposed that they went to check on their children who were in their respective rooms.'

    According to Tapas statements this group only had ONE baby monitor between them therefore WALKIE TALKIES is incorrect.

    Also 'children in their respective rooms' how did he know they were in their RESPECTIVE ROOMS did he check personally or was this what he was told to say.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Neither Clarence Mitchell nor Dave Edgar were witnesses to any of the events that night. It is up to them whether they believe Madeleine was abducted that night or not. They can't provide any witness testimony to support that theory, and there is no forensic or other evidence consistent with an abduction. The only pointer towards abduction is the absence of the child. It would carry as much weight to say that the absence of the child pointed towards alien abduction. So what they believe is their business. They can't 'lie' about it because they weren't witnesses to it. They have expressed a belief - that's different.


    In the case, however, of the presence of the McCanns and their friends at the Tapas, there are numerous examples of eyewitness testimony, including a holidaymaker who, together with his wife had a conversation with the McCanns.

    Now - kindly explain why any of those eyewitnesses should conspire together to lie about the presence of the McCanns in the Tapas, and why other staff and holidaymakers would lie about their presence on other nights.

    Because for me, eyewitness testimony from all these people certainly trumps Textusa's mad ramblings about a round table.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Insane,

    From what I understand, YOU define what is nonsense, YOU define what is immaterial, YOU define who is lying. No wonder YOU think YOUR version (which we still don't know what it is) is the ONLY correct one.

    You're REALLY obsessed with this blog. I read various on the subject and have never seen such obsession for a particular one. You either know Textusa personally and hate his/her guts, or whatever Textusa is saying is really getting to you.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anon @ 10,18

    Why do you need anyone to provide you with a ''version''?

    Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?

    I'm not the one accusing witnesses of lying, remember. I leave that to Textusa. She has decided an entire raft of witnesses have provided false witness

    Do try to have a thought of your own. Thinking is SO important

    ReplyDelete
  58. Insane,

    So now YOU determine who THINKS and who doesn't? You have yourself in pretty high-consideration haven't you?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Let's think then... Insane, scould you teel us why the ONE BIG ROUND TABLE (as clearly stated by Tanner) is nonsense, and why the fact that Peleja sees only 3 couples (six people) on the esplanade is irrelevant?
    Please assume that I'm unable to think and explain.

    ReplyDelete
  60. It's like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a potato.

    Peleja places the McCann group in the Tapas - the very thing Textusa has declared impossible.

    I don't give a rat's arse about the table, round or otherwise. I couldn't care less if they were sitting on packing crates around an upturned dustbin. It isn't me claiming the story about the round table is nonsense - it's Textusa. Ask her.

    I have assumed that you are unable to think. You provide ample evidence of this.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Insane,

    peleja places 6 people in Tapas on May 3rd, just like Textusa says. That leaves Russell, Jane and Matt that night, just like Textusa says.

    Even sitting on crates, it would have to be a BIG ROUND TABLE. The problem is not where they sit, but the space required to be seated...

    ReplyDelete
  62. Yes - and Stephen Carpenter places the McCanns there, as he had a conversation with them.

    Sadly, fascinating though this has been (no, really) I have to depart for a while.

    I look forward to returning later to see how Textusa explains that her big round table theory trumps all the eyewitness testimony.

    Take it easy, and try not to have an original thought. You might do yourself an injury.....

    ReplyDelete
  63. Restaurants generally push 'square' tablets together for larger parties, a 'big round table' especially out of season would take up a lot of space in an already empty restaurant.
    Also considering the time of year it would have been chilly and dark, table candles would have blown out why sit outside in the cold and dark.
    The group refused to say who paid for what, could not produce any receipts and refused to show their bank statements, because the dinner never took place otherwise they would have shown bank statements or restaurant bills to prove it had the reason they did not have these receipts was they had no proof at all that they were ever there in the first place.
    They wrote a 'timeline' in Maddies book that they were supposed to memorise but again because it was all 'rushed' they became muddled and unsure of facts and again would/could not remember what they were wearing that evening.
    Their 'pact of silence' is because they have already told so many lies they dare not contradict one another anymore.
    RE-OPEN the case.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Quote Insane (not a nom-de-plume).
    Feb 19, 7:46

    "Certainly not, Textusa. As I said, it's a site where we don't tolerate your sort, and we certainly wouldn't tolerate any of your idiot friends." Unquote

    Unfortunately, you disqualify yourself completely by the above quote.

    ReplyDelete
  65. @ 9.56

    As has been said here before 'the devil is in the detail'.

    To be precise, Mr Peleja does not place the group in the Tapas but states he saw 3 couples, now THINK about this....3 couple = 6 people....are you keeping up so far?

    Now THINK how easy it is for 6 people to put 2 tables together and sit at them....no fuss, no attention and not unusual. Also they are sitting on the esplanade according to Mr Paleja. BUT THINK about 9 people sitting inside the Tapas, where there was a table prepared before they were supposed to arrive every evening. Very noticeable especially when the waiter says they had a table beside the bar but Jane Tanner says it was at the front by the tarpaulin then later that the 'table moves'...yes she does say the table moves....to the middle.
    ...oh just read her statement again...about it being a ROUND table made up of separate tables...quantum physics? No, just impossible unless all the tables were the shape of Dairylea cheeses. So MINOR details are extremely important.....such as timings. The whole 'abduction' scenario was built on timings. Did you read Russell O'Brien's timelines? Notice the minutes?

    The reason the shape of the table is important is because it didn't exist and if that didn't exist what else was make believe?

    Somebody is getting very hot under the collar over this table and there has to be a reason.

    And why did all the staff there that evening lose their jobs after this event. Where are they now?

    ReplyDelete
  66. I do not agree with all of Textusa's ideas but for opponents to use the statement of Steven Carpenter to prove the Tapas dinners happened is bizarre.

    He is either a dreamer or a liar, he clearly states all the Tapas group were sitting around the table at 8.30pm.The Tapas group, the McCanns, the Paynes, the Oldfields, Tanner and ROB say this is not true, so his statement can be discarded as worthless.

    Then read what he says about Murat and you wonder who put him up to it.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Peleja's words:

    ''A few minutes later, when it was around 21H20, he heard some clamour, which made him leave toward the restaurant, a few meters away, and was then informed that a child had disappeared."

    Poster's words:

    "The timing is immaterial"


    Really? A 40 minutes discrepance is immaterial?! In the Tapas9 version, Kate rose the alarm at around 10pm. For me, around 10pm can be 9.55, 10.05, 10.10, but NOT 10.40, for instance! I accept people to be wrong about timings, if the difference is of 5 ot 10 minute, well, let's say a quart of an hour, but 40 minutes?!
    NO WAY!

    ReplyDelete
  68. totallyconfused20 Feb 2011, 16:01:00

    Well, this post has certainly caused a large response.....!!!!!

    I have to say that a few minutes ago my brain (which is not insane- I even have the paperwork to prove it!) was focussed on an issue to do with the 'language' used in DNotices and the FOI request to Leicestershire Police regarding this case.

    I have to say that in the past Textusa has asked me to be a guest contributor here and I genuinely have just not had the time. However, I can say that I am currently working on something: It will look at all the intrarelationships between Ore, the McCann case, D Notices/FOI's,the behaviours and attitudes of the various 'authorities' to child protection in the UK, the tabloids, the impact of all of this on individuals, families and the UK laws. At present the intention is for it to be called 'Digging for Ore' but some of it may be included in another publication which is in shorthand being called 'NFAC'.

    Truth and fact are very powerful weapons; so are morality and a sense of justice.....
    Regards to All
    TC

    ReplyDelete
  69. I'm Anon Feb 20, 2011 10:58:00 AM

    I was in a hurry and said that Textusa said that it was Russell, Jane and Matt that were out of the table on May 3rd, but meant to say Gerry instead of Matt.

    Irrelevant of what you Insane think might be irrelevant of time, Peleja goes in, stays in around 20 minutes (in his opinion) and comes out. When he goes in, he sees SIX people at ONE table. Where are all the other supposed guests? Where are the missing THREE Tapas? Where in the testimonies are THREE Tapas missing from the table AT THE SAME TIME? Yes Peleja places the Tapas inside Tapas on May 3rd, and does not place them in any other night. Textusa has been VERY CLEAR that the only dinner ever existed in Tapas was on May 3rd. Sina J has PROVED that even that one was totally made up in terms of how it went. "Your" lying witnesses try to convey that it was a "normal" table, while, as we can see, it was a table made up to be seen they were having dinner.

    Another thing, why doesit bother you SO MUCH that these people be "wrongfully" accused? Could it be that you promised these people that they could lie because you had everything under control, even had the UK Gov backing you up, so they wouldn't get into any trouble if they said what you wanted them to say, and now YOU'RE not keeping to YOUR word?

    No, you don't want us to think. You want us NOT to think. Unfortunately for you there are blogs like this one. Keep it up SISTERS!!!

    ReplyDelete
  70. ''The group refused to say who paid for what, could not produce any receipts and refused to show their bank statements, because the dinner never took place otherwise they would have shown bank statements or restaurant bills to prove it had the reason they did not have these receipts was they had no proof at all that they were ever there in the first place.''

    Horseshit

    The dinner did take place, there are plenty of eyewitnesses

    ReplyDelete
  71. ''Really? A 40 minutes discrepance is immaterial?! In the Tapas9 version, Kate rose the alarm at around 10pm. For me, around 10pm can be 9.55, 10.05, 10.10, but NOT 10.40, for instance! I accept people to be wrong about timings, if the difference is of 5 ot 10 minute, well, let's say a quart of an hour, but 40 minutes?! ''

    According to Textusa, they were never there at all, so a timing discrepancy is immaterial.

    What you are saying is that you don't believe Textusa either. Good for you

    ReplyDelete
  72. ''Keep it up SISTERS!!!''

    Oh please !

    Make up your minds.
    You are arguing about the timings stated by Mr Peleja, and whom he might have seen, whilst at the same time supporting Textusa in her assertion that it never happened at all.

    At least try to be consistent in your delusions, otherwise it just gets boring.......

    ReplyDelete
  73. ''I do not agree with all of Textusa's ideas but for opponents to use the statement of Steven Carpenter to prove the Tapas dinners happened is bizarre.

    He is either a dreamer or a liar, he clearly states all the Tapas group were sitting around the table at 8.30pm.The Tapas group, the McCanns, the Paynes, the Oldfields, Tanner and ROB say this is not true, so his statement can be discarded as worthless.

    Then read what he says about Murat and you wonder who put him up to it.''

    People often get the timings slightly wrong - no big deal
    Plenty of other eyewitnesses said the Tapas dinners happened - it's only the numpties on here that seem to think they didn't

    ReplyDelete
  74. I Insane, then you still around, again digging your own cave.

    After your long post, now with less insults(at least you learn some manners) you still unable to provide consistent information and name your witnesses. Your answer" go to the files, read the files" become a joke. Most of us already read all the files and much more.
    Repeating your arguments did not make them more valid or true. Like a Parrot, you are delivering the same 5, 6 witnesses, connected with Resort and why not, with Mccann's.
    Did you know what is the avalanche effect? One lie buy another lie and so on. After few lies, even the liars start believing on their lies and delivering them as true and accurate information.
    Show us another independent witnesses who placed the Mccann's and their friends in the Tapas, for a dinner, on May 3.
    Stop playing your silly game about the files. Going around the same witnesses will make you dizzy and more desperate.
    As was suggested before, I really like to know your opinion about the swinger/OC, on that particular week. This activity was suggested by some investigators since the early days and never clearly dismissed. you seems to run away from that issue, avoiding comments.
    Which part of Mccann's game was played by the Hubbards and the guy who hand to them at the first time the keys of the church? Those are real and relevant witnesses.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Insane,

    Quoting you "According to Textusa, they were never there at all, so a timing discrepancy is immaterial."

    Quoting Textusa, "responding" to the question "The other OC guests at the dinner have also supposedly lied in their statements?" from a "Preciousramotswe", Textusa clearly says "Well, if they said they saw the Tapas eating at Tapas in any other date other than May 3rd, than yes, they’re lying".

    Textusa, like Peleja, says that they were there on May 3rd, so don't go saying otherwise. Textusa, like Peleja, says that there were only 6 Tapas. That's a discrepancy I see you avoid talking about, as well as the BIG ROUND TABLE.

    This is from the post "Textusa Meltdown2 on 13Dec. Please read what Textusa HAS SAID before you quote her.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Very interesting analysis - I mean VERY interesting indeed: http://www.examiner.com/criminal-profiles-in-national/madeleine-mccann-u-s-a-profile-of-the-possibility

    ReplyDelete
  77. Insane @ 10:07,
    Why you insist in placing the lies under a conspiracy issue? Textusa is not saying that the lies were a conspiracy. Those are your words, without sense again. Conspiracy means a plan prepared with time many days before. WE know, according your words, the reality was horrendous. But the lies were not part of a conspiracy. People( workers) were asked to repeat to the police a certain type of story, without time to plan anything with accuracy. This is why they delivered unconsistencies that cannot be substanciated with any other evidence.
    Why the Mccann's did not reopen the case and leave it reach the court? If all those witnesses told the truth and the dinner was real, a court will be able to find it. They know and you know, they lied. The Mccann's are not this kind of persons who lost an opportunnity to bring to light such convennient witnesses who placed them in a dinner that gave them the lenght to be negligent and allow the abduction to happen. What are you all affraid?

    ReplyDelete
  78. ''Quoting you "According to Textusa, they were never there at all, so a timing discrepancy is immaterial."

    Quoting Textusa, "responding" to the question "The other OC guests at the dinner have also supposedly lied in their statements?" from a "Preciousramotswe", Textusa clearly says "Well, if they said they saw the Tapas eating at Tapas in any other date other than May 3rd, than yes, they’re lying".

    Textusa, like Peleja, says that they were there on May 3rd, so don't go saying otherwise. Textusa, like Peleja, says that there were only 6 Tapas. That's a discrepancy I see you avoid talking about, as well as the BIG ROUND TABLE.

    This is from the post "Textusa Meltdown2 on 13Dec. Please read what Textusa HAS SAID before you quote her.''

    You mean when she had to change her mind, and say that they did take dinner at the Tapas that night, despite having categorically stated earlier that there were no tapas dinners?

    Oh yes - I know all about that. That isn't really the point though, is it, Textusa's backtracking. This is about Textusa's assertion and accusation that the eyewitnesses conspired together to lie. I hope you are not going to claim she didn't say that, because she repeated it in an earlier post

    ReplyDelete
  79. If the OC is involved, it is possible they hid Maddies corpse in one of their empty rooms, as it was out of season there would have been many and with fridges, nobody ever searched all their apartments especially if they were locked and unoccupied. Sr Amarel suspected her body had been moved to different locations, she could have been there all the time.

    Then Gerry did his 'stroller' bit to be seen walking towards the beach to put people off the scent.

    Maybe that's why so many OC Staff have lost their jobs perhaps they were asking too many questions.

    ReplyDelete
  80. ''After your long post, now with less insults(at least you learn some manners) you still unable to provide consistent information and name your witnesses. Your answer" go to the files, read the files" become a joke. Most of us already read all the files and much more. ''

    I named them all for you earlier - perhaps you might like to try reading it

    ReplyDelete
  81. " a pint of water into your PC and put yourself out of action " LOL!

    Why not a beer or a nice wine or champagne ?

    Oh crazy person - the insane ! The insane with a little blog unhhhh .

    Será o espalha brasas da Ilha do Alberto JJ?

    Aquele que foi na cantiga de um presidiário e meteu gente dentro de água?

    Aquele dos vídeos com espíritos ?

    Bom, de manhã reli uns tantos comentários/diálogos e, agora li os restantes.

    Vejam só como um pequeno editorial permitiu um fim de semana tão engraçado à custa do insane. Tolo! Utilizou o adjectivo e passou a ser a alcunha dele.

    Insane para sempre, oh insane! Grande pontaria !


    ( pour ou pôr ? Eis a questão !

    ReplyDelete
  82. I don't understand why Insane DOESN'T understand what Textusa and Sina J are getting at.

    It seems clear to me but there again I THINK things through logically and with the benefit of time. I have no axe to grind or anything to lose so keep an emotional detachment, isn't that what doctors have to do?

    This poor guy is going to have an MI if he's not careful. We should all go easy on him and explain what he's (deliberately?) missing.

    He may have a lot to lose and people commenting here are highlighting the impossibility of what was supposed to have happened.

    I really would like to know why Insane will not share the blog he purports to be part of. Surely synergy will help solve this case?

    ReplyDelete
  83. We the Bronte-Cohen Sisters, would like to take this opportunity to sincerely congratulate all our readers. Words cannot describe the elation it is to feel what we feel when we write for people like you.

    You, like the courageous and intelligent soldiers that you are, have proudly stood your ground.

    We’re not saying this because you kept PATIENTLY contradicting someone has absolutely nothing to say except to show the discomfort that this blog represents to people like him/her and the horrid despair felt by knowing that not only we’re determined to continue, but that you intend to continue with us. That is a very scary thought for these people.

    But we’re congratulating you for your show of dignity, elevation and education. Faced with a foul-mouthed attack that only was seeking disruption by lowering down the standards of this blog, you kept you head high and proud. You never conceded one inch of respect, and by that, you helped this blog earn a ton of the stuff.

    One day, when this comment box will be read, you will be seen has having made proud the cause of seeking justice for Maddie, the ultimate object for which we’re all fighting for. Shoulder to shoulder, each doing what each one can.

    Any blogger, is today, or should rightfully be, envious of all of us Sisters for the kind of readers you’ve shown to be.

    It’s so, so gratifying to be writing these words right now.

    Thank you.

    Textusa, Sina J and May I

    ReplyDelete
  84. An offer to Nom de Plume Insane Harpic:

    http://www.ehow.com/video_4539366_make-harpic-vodka-drink.html

    ReplyDelete
  85. And can I just say Tex, Sina J and May I thanks for that wonderful message, together we will find justice for Maddie, I have also felt inspired by all the posters and their comments at present 75 posts and still rising.

    Thank you xx

    ReplyDelete
  86. We wouldn't have people like you on our site. We hold no truck with deluded and silly women who couldn't find their arses with both hands, even with the assistance of a map emblazoned with lots of arrows - something of a Textusa speciality, I know.

    This site serves as little more than an outlet for Textusa's perverted and perverse agenda, and those of you who lack the capacity for independent thought merely add fuel to her fire.

    In the past year or so, I have witnessed her accuse of lying, without any rhyme or reason, numerous witnesses without ever providing one credible reason for accusing them.

    This list includes a priest, other holidaymakers, staff from Mark Warners, an elderly neighbour - totally ridiculous.

    Wake up, simpletons. She's taking the piss and you can't even see it. Next time she comes up with some barking mad suggestion, why don't you take a step back and examine her motives? Ask yourself why she's an internet laughing stock, and why people piss themselves laughing at your blindless sycophancy.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anon 10.02

    You are just full of hot air - not once have you mentioned the name of your site - you have just come here to post insults and to be sarcastic and that is in fact the greatest form of flatery so why don't you get your medication sorted out and stop being a naughty boy surely it is way past your bedtime.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Insane
    "Ask yourself why she's an internet laughing stock, and why people piss themselves laughing at your blindless sycophancy"

    Don't you see who is the laughing stock? It's not Textusa! Look in THAT mirror we know you have.

    You really are making a big issue about something you SAY you are not involved with but your actions are out of all proportion to a person with a passing interest in what happened to a little girl.
    It doesn't matter how much you swear or how many insults you hurl it won't help your cause OR the most important cause, justice for Maddy.

    If you have something positive to say to highlight the facts then please share it to put all the evidence together. You won't allow us to see the evidence you have on YOUR blog, maybe that doesn't exist either?

    I can't see a single shred of information you have provided so what is your mission? To attempt to destroy the credibility of people who have made information more accessible?

    You are seem to be the voice of the desperate few left to face the consequences.

    Swearing adds nothing to a debate so why not leave that at the school gates where you learned it. We prefer a reasoned debate not temper tantrums.

    ReplyDelete
  89. 10.02 - Posters such as yourself who use expletives as adjectives are themselves 'simpletons' as you mention.
    May I respectfully suggest you purchase a dictionary and then join us in some intellegent and meaningful vocabulary/discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  90. “Certainly not, Textusa. As I said, it's a site where we don't tolerate your sort, and we certainly wouldn't tolerate any of your idiot friends.”

    “We wouldn't have people like you on our site. We hold no truck with deluded and silly women who couldn't find their arses with both hands, even with the assistance of a map emblazoned with lots of arrows - something of a Textusa speciality, I know.”

    Now, isn’t that just so CHILDISH? Insane, if you want to be treated like a grown-up, do start behaving like one, will you?

    ReplyDelete
  91. I Insane 7:05

    You still on with your little joke: Who are those witnesses from the files? THE SAME 5, 6 YOU TALK AT EVERY POST PRETENDING TO MULTIPLY THEM AND TRANSFORM THEM IN "ALL WITNESSES AND HOLIDAYMAKERS"?
    Why are you trying to manipulate Textusa posts to serve your accusations of conspiracy and bla, bla,bla?
    Why should Textusa be afraid of you or what you are posting or trying to pass here? You really remind me a certain guy and his arrogance, especially outside Lisbon court, when backed by his Portuguese lawyer, he was absolutely sure that a judge was already bayed and part of his game. Later, he had to eat his words... the 'tribunal da relacao' with 3 judges, gave the true picture about the real situation- Amaral has his right to defend himself and tell the public what an investigation about what he was in charged, achieved. What he said, is in the files and all the investigators (including the British) come to the same conclusion. From Amaral book, we can also see how he and the rest of his team feel strange some statements gave by some witnesses, not only the Mccann's friends but also the workers from the Resort. On that bouquet of special people, two groups shine really, really amazing-THE NANNIES AND THE TAPAS WORKERS. The nannies, we know how they were took out of Portugal in a rush and kept under Mccann's/ Mitchell control in UK (even British papers reported it by saying that the nannies met the Mccann's in UK and were asked to keep their locations hide and fade in low profile by THE MCCANN'S. Not by the police). Why the Mccann's hunted the nannies? If they gave true statements to the police, if the creche records were accurate, no reason to frame that girls. Same with Tapas workers.
    CONT:

    ReplyDelete
  92. CONT:
    You don't read the files. But, why reading them? You already know what happened to Madeleine, "WAS AN HORRENDOUS REALITY" but you can always read Amaral book (available in PDF, for free in many languages at Internet). The language of the book is much easy then the used in the files. And most of the "little draws" you wrongly attribute to Textusa, in reality came from the files and Amaral book. They were used here and redecorated just to highlight the truth. Are the truth and the way Textusa highlighted it, what make you panic and react. And you don't even understand that what you are doing to Textusa can be considered a crime. Other bloggers like Joana Morais also experienced and reported to their readers such kind of threats, intimidation and persecution. ONLY WHO HAD SOMETHING TO LOST takes the boat you still on.
    The 3 judges in Lisbon were clear and legitimate all our comments in the Internet- The Mccann's by bringing the Media into the case, by insulting the all public, specially the portuguese, by refusing to do the reconstruction and answering vital questions, by suing the police and everyone who don't believe their theory, legitimate ALL CRITICS, QUESTIONS,COMMENTS,?????,etc,etc... BUT THEY DON'T LEGITIMATE THREATS, INSULTS, INTIMIDATIONS, simple because that is a crime. And that is what you are doing to Textusa, using again and again the same 5,6 witnesses ( who became discredit by their own words) and again and again the same question( already answered many times by Textusa and other people).
    CONT.

    ReplyDelete
  93. CONT:
    Many of us follow that case since minute one and feel doubts about the Mccann's since the early days. I believe, very few went to Mccann's site to threat them, insult them or intimidate. They teach the public to do it. They use their media machine to do it with all innocent suspects they conveniently grab into the case to suit their agenda. And what they have done to Amaral, using lawyers, M3 and Marcos Aragao is without classification (specially the 1,2 M Euros and the divorce proposal to get half part of his properties). What the Anti are called on their PRO Site/Blog supporters is behind reality, totally unethical. That just give us more strength to look for the truth but definitely we don't use the same methods. We discuss facts; we dismiss them, if they don't make sense. Textusa, Joana, Astro, Sina j, May I and many others, used science to explain or discredit what by intrinsically reasons could just be IMPOSSIBLE or with a VERY LOW PROBABILITY.
    CONT.

    ReplyDelete
  94. CONT:
    I noticed that there are hot issues that you consistently refuse or avoid to touch. Some were already asked- The swinger, the Fund, the Anglican Priests and some British expat living around PDL who become great supporters of the Mccann's ( a couple who went to PDL for a short holiday, less then a week, for the first time). Remember? In May, June, 2007 they were busy in the Media also trying to sell the idea of being in Algarve and PDL for the first time. The time shows us, they lied. But since they are experts in many things, I really want to learn with them how we can make a so strong friendship with somebody we don't know, in a place where we spend just short holidays. What is THAT CHAIN THAT KEEP ALL THAT PEOPLE TOGHETER? Maybe, you can bring some light to my mind, dear Insane or is it INSANE for a non thinking person like me?
    NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THE ALL WITNESSES ( HOLIDAYMAKERS OR WORKERS) LIED TO THE POLICE. Just an appetizer...THIS ONE NOT- Silvia Batista, did not lie and you know why- She was not in the resort before the alarm being raised and nobody predicted that she could be called and arrive at almost the same time as GNR and gave her statement almost immediately.
    CONT.

    ReplyDelete
  95. CONT:
    No, I don't believe in conspiracy, in any one. I believe in a plan made up by the Tapas 9 put in place with help of Tapas 10 or 11, without many time to stick the details with accuracy on their brains. Over the time those details appear to be their Karma this is why they meet in a rush in a secret hotel in UK, before PJ going there to re-interrogate the Tapas 7 . They tried to remember the details and fit their story without success because they don't know what is inside the closed files. THEIR ENTIRE CIRCUS IS TO INTIMIDATE PJ AND SEE IF THEY DISCLOSE THE FILES WITHOUT REOPENING THE INVESTIGATION. They know, the day the investigation become reopened, their arguido status will become on again and perhaps, some more people will gain that status, their friends and some witnesses. The end of my last sentence, explain you why some witnesses who lied in the early statements keep their mouths closed? Did you open your mouth if that will bring you into the FOX MOUTH? NO... But you will insult and go to blogs trying to intimidate and discredit everyone who discovered your lies and pass that information to the big public.
    Have a good day Insane...

    ReplyDelete
  96. Anon @ 7.39 completely agree with you Insane has only come here to cause disruption, if he knows something he should go to the police not come here insulting us.

    When the case is re-opened the Tapas people will be made suspects along with K & G because now we know they are ALL involved, so there 'pact of silence' has not done them any favours they should never have got involved in the first place.

    I still wonder if Maddie was hidden in the Ocean Clubs holiday empty apartments, no-one would have thought of searching there especially as mccanns kept pushing the abduction theory.

    The DNA could have gotten into the scenic via something she was wrapped in that they placed in the boot before burning DNA on the keyfob so it appears things touched by mccanns had the DNA.

    Maybe she is even buried within the grounds of the OC.

    ReplyDelete
  97. "...why she's an internet laughing stock, and why people piss themselves laughing at your blindless sycophancy." 10:02

    How do you know that? From where came that information? Name 'where is that Internet where those things are hapenning'? Is that your little site trough where you have to sweat, for after more then 4 years, have some little e-mails supporting your Tale?
    God bless you with all inventions, my dear.
    I'm far from the truth if instead of calling you Insane or Yawn, I call you KATE?
    After all, how many time did you already waste here trying to sell your fish without success?
    Do you remember what Kate said outside Lisbon Court when a 'Stupid journalist'( using your adjectives) pose to her some questions regarding the shocking pictures found by her lawyer? She admitted she knows nothing about those pictures because she have not read the files. ( Why she look so much like you, or you like her?). What was the use of the translations so advertised in the Media and for what donations were asked? How can she?you not read the files regarding Madeleine?
    From where come the information about Textusa being mocked at Internet? I don't spend much time in the Internet to see or know that. I come regularly here and to some other Blogs dedicated to Madeleine and to the Truth. I never saw nothing laughing or insulting Textusa. You must be a client or the owner of other sites, were lies are trying to be passed and got very, very uncomfortable with what is being discussed here,
    After all, in Lisbon, Kate also said that surfing in the Internet and organising her site become her master job. She/you have the tools to do it in a better position then anybody else. Mitchell use to be the guy in the top Internet spy. Gamble, I believe, have also some good skills and kate feels untouchable for whatever she wanted to do.
    If you are not kate, then what scares you. What make you connected with all saga? Why are you so piss off because few bloggers don't buy some lies and refuse to gave some antenna to the spin mccann's Media machine. After all, that time, your fight starts because Textusa use a very short post to say That from now their blog will be not publicising anything related with Mccann's that came from the UK tabloids.
    You know that the posts did not ranslate the amount of people who came here everyday to see accurate news. Her rafic window show a huge number. The UK tabloids target Uk citizens with poor literacy. The readers of that blog or of Joana Morais, came from across the world and and the big majority were people with high instruction, speaking many languages and having high skills in many issues. It is that what scares you, not Textusa herself. She open the door for other experts who are discrediting you with sense and science. It is just a question of time. The avalanche of information will lead the PJ to reopen the case with you requesting it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Insane,

    You say Textusa has wrongfully accused some people of lying. According to you “This list includes a priest, other holidaymakers, staff from Mark Warners, an elderly neighbour - totally ridiculous.”

    I’m supposing that the priest you’re referring to is Fathet Heal. Do you really think that he’s words are true?

    And why refer to him as “priest” while saying “elderly neighbour” when speaking about Mrs Fenn. They seem to be around the same age, so why not “elderly priest” or just “neighbour” or “lady neighbour”? That’s being a little patronizing or trying to turn Mrs Fenn into a nice little old lady out of a fairy tale story book… You know, many of us are older than Mrs Fenn (long past your fixation on the menopausal milestone) and do not like to be called elderly.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Bom dia ! Good morning!

    A blog inside textusa ´s blog ?

    Another contributor ? Upssssssssssss

    Insane, Kate or whatever, please, if you had a blog , i think you must write there. Why here ? I don ´t understand.

    Because here you can get 15 minutes of fame?
    Because you know, here, people come to read?

    So, we read what you write ?

    So c-l-e-v-e-r.................

    So, Insane, you profite from others ?

    No nice.


    MC

    ReplyDelete
  100. Sometimes, fortunately, fortune and fate do decide to play their tricks.

    Your picture to illustrate this post couldn«t have been more fortunate, Textusa.

    Obviously you didn't expect such a nice and big turn out to a post of you just saying that you're no longer buying into tabloid idiocy, but guess who showed up? A parrot mistaking free speech with careless talk. How more futuristic could you have been?

    Insane, like the animal portrayed, will repeat what he has learned to repeat, independent of whatever he's told or explained: he's anti McCann and that you're baseless in your statements.

    You could explain a million times your basis, and he could show you a million how evidently he is in favour of the McCanns, and what he will say next? "I'm anti and you haven't based a single accusation". Just like the parrot in the picture.

    About his blog... I can only imagine his solitude. His keyboard must be a faucet, his screen a mirror, as he's only talking to himself certainly. And he must have a secret password to login as well...

    ReplyDelete
  101. 10.10 - absolutely brilliant you took the very words out of my mouth - fantastic post.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Congratulations 100 comments Textusa proves the public DO WANT TO KNOW what happened to Madeleine McCann, and we will not stop until we know the TRUTH.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Who would believe the witness statement of Stephen Carpenter? Is he a credible witness?

    Quote from his statement
    "At approximately HALF PAST EIGHT, GERRY and KATE and their GROUP of approximately TEN people were ALREADY SEATED at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them, we spoke of tennis amongst other things,"

    AH...the moving growing BIG ROUND TABLE.

    Someone is lying?????

    This contradiction is there for public consumption.

    If this is so obvious then are we expected to trust the waiters statements?

    ReplyDelete
  104. Cont:

    More from Carpente


    "Between approximately a quarter past nine and half past nine we left the Tapas bar to go home"

    This is AFTER saying about his only visit to the Tapas on the 3rd May.

    "I vaguely remember that Gerry and Kate and other people from the group would leave the table in intervals (inaudible), I think it was to check on the children , but I do not remember with what frequency or how many times the people left the table to check on the children."

    This man is psychic, he tells us he leaves the Tapas at 9.15 just as the group tell us they had just congregated and were ordering food yet knows what they were doing after he left?
    Maybe not psychic, perhaps someone forgot to update his script.

    I bet Mr Carpenter won't want his statement scrutinised like the statements about the Tapas dinners!

    ReplyDelete
  105. Congratulations Insane,

    Your posts lead to people who were not aware of the statemens gave by all those bunch of liars, to read them. Now, more people is aware about the lies and the unconsistencies. Some posted showing you how idiot you become.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Anon 11:35/11:44:
    Exactly!

    No way the entire group (of 10 people??? the elusive Tapas10...?) was assembled around the diner table at 20:30! They arrived in "installments", the Paynes were the last to get there, at least 15 minutes late, they were taking so long that one from the group had to go and "chevy" them to the Tapas bar!

    ReplyDelete
  107. I have just read Stephen Carpenter's statement again in light of what has been said. Read in comparison to other statements.....OMG, there are some glaring discrepancies!

    I think Textusa might well consign his statement to Room 101 along with the BIG ROUND TABLE and the waiters' statements. So who is left who can be a credible witness on 3rd May?

    ReplyDelete

Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.

Textusa