(Aug 26th, 2011)
Jane Tanner is quite adamant when she describes the table the T9 used at Tapas.
She says it was ROUND. However impossible it is to join up ROUND tables to make up a bigger ROUND one, as she says happened, she's clear of what shape was the end result: a BIG ROUND TABLE (BRT), the famous table #211, the T9 BRT:
Kate McCann takes this one step up, and, through a drawing, confirms Tanner’s verbal description of the table, one perfect circle:
And if there were to be any doubts about the shape of the thing, Gerry McCann, in moving pictures, describes, with his left arm, the shape (and size) of the table under scrutiny: ROUND as ROUND can be:
So we have 3 out 9 people who say they sat, night after night, at that particular table, describing it, and all say that the exact same thing: it was ROUND.
But a few days ago, Guerra, a respectable reader, placed the following comment on the Tapas Quiz Night Question 5/? post: “I don't know if the Tapas gang did or did not sit at a big round table, but I would just like to relate my experience in dealing with big round tables. I worked a few months as a busboy during the summer many years ago when I was seventeen.
And I along with my work colleagues set up large banquet halls. I do remember setting up many many round tables. We each rolled a table on its edge as if we were rolling a tire. Then when the table was at the location we wanted it to be we would unfold the legs and prop it up. At first I had some issues with run away tables but I later became an expert at it.
If I remember correctly, the tables I rolled when they were on edge were as tall or taller than I am. I'm about 5ft 10 in. Mathematically, if 9 people are sitting at a table, and you allow 2 ft of circumference for each person then the total circumference would be 18 ft.
The circumference for a circle is PI multiplied by the diameter. So you should be able to accomodate 9 people at a round table of approximately 6 ft in diameter. That being said, if you look at the following video by Martin Brunt, he is sitting at a table that he claims the McCanns were sitting at and it appears that the table is not a true round table but more of an oval table, with round ends that were joined together.
Of course we can't be sure that it's the exact table that was used by the McCanns and their friends.”
The novelty about Guerra’s comment is that he brings into the “equation” a new variable, and that is the possibility that the T9 BRT may, in fact NOT be a BRT but a BOT, a BIG OVAL TABLE.
Looking at the video, the shape of table where Martin Brunt is sitting seems to be, in fact, oval and what isn’t questionable is that he clearly says that he’s sitting at the SAME table where the T9 sat on the fateful evening.
THAT table is, according to SKY NEWS, the famous T9 BRT/BOT.
Finally, we have visual contact!!!
And that is one huge step forward. From now on, if any other picture of the T9 BRT ever surfaces, they have to match THIS table. If they don’t, then either they’re fake, or fake is Martin Brunt.
And what Martin Brunt says to be the table #211, does appears to be oval.
Is the shape of the table that important? Yes, it is, especially if one is to analyses adequately the “Brunt table”, which we will, hopefully, in the next post.
Martin Brunt’s video encapsulates much, much more than just the shape of that particular object in that particular commercial facility.
It is very, very revealing.
What’s important today is the Black Hat’s attitude to this input from our reader, Guerra.
Insane, our pet troll, jumped gleefully like a two year old, when he finally realized, or so he thought, he could to disprove the blog with fact instead of the usual threats and insults.
So when an anonymous reader commented that restaurants worldwide don’t have oval tables, Insane just let it all rip: “"There's no restaurant in the world with oval tables!" Really? It took me all of 10 seconds to find several, including this one, which states: "Parties of 10-20 people can be seated at one large oval table." http://colesrestaurant.co.uk/private-hire/
Oh, don't tell me - they're in on the conspiracy theory too! Do you have any idea how ridiculous you make yourself look?"
And with that, Insane just did a TANNER.
And what is a TANNER? A TANNER is a convenient and conscious change of one’s “convictions” not in accordance to reason but due to changes in direction in the winds of reality.
It’s a reactive, not proactive, process. It is not a change of mind after a thought-out process whereby one concludes, justifiably, that one’s initial opinion is wrong and must be changed under the penalty of useless stubbornness.
That is one commendable attitude, doing a TANNER is not.
It's changing one's opinion because what one said before just stopped making sense, and then changing it again, or not, because what we said first might start, or not, to make more sense then what we said after, and... you understand, what I'm saying. Quite confusing and totally shameless.
Doing a TANNER is to change opinion due to unreasonable reasons.
Who can forget Jane Tanner first seeing and then not seeing a blanket, being unable to see any facial features but then being able to detect afterwards small patterns in pyjamas, changing the colour of the abductor’s pants, then his hair length of hair, then… ?
Basically, it’s changing one’s opinion and being able to achieve only two things.
The first is to highlight the total falsehood of one’s initial version(s), and the second, to make a fool out of oneself.
That is a TANNER.
So Insane goes and searches enthusiastically the internet to prove that OVAL is a feasible shape for one of tables at Tapas, namely for table #211. It takes him 10 seconds, so he says.
What he does next is not a TANNER but a McCANN.
A McCANN is when one is allowed to resort to the most ridiculous of arguments and then argument away to the point of self-determined certainty that what is ridiculous isn’t ridiculous at all, or after all, which is ridiculous in itself, even if all is said with a straight face, a very difficult task that only few are able to master, and Gerry McCann is NOT one of those who has been able to, not by a long shot.
The same anonymous reader that was attacked by Insane, pointed out in response that comparing Tapas with Coles is like comparing the United States with East-Timor.
Both commercial facilities serve drinks, and both countries are bathed by the Pacific Ocean, and that’s it.
It’s just one ridiculous comparison.
But why is this relevant?
Well, when Insane goes after the OVAL look, by doing a TANNER, he thinks he's able, as we said, to disprove this blog. But what he does, is exactly the opposite.
When everyone, on the Black Hat side of things, clearly states that the table is ROUND, what does Insane goes and do? He goes after OVAL like a bulldog after a postman’s leg, and does a TANNER.
And when one does a TANNER one is only able to botch things up for one's side.
Desperate people do desperate things, and desperate things are never done right, like the Tapas "reservation" sheets never cease to show us.
What he doesn’t realize, is that if we were able to prove that the table was OVAL, it would please very much the authors and readers of this blog.
It would be further proof that the T9 were lying, wouldn't it?
He should have defended with all his might that the table was ROUND, and not OVAL!
There's no other option for Insane, but to defend that that table was ROUND.
To defend any other shape will just backfire.
The ROUNDNESS of the table, against it being OVAL, is the only option to confirm the reality of those Tapas dinners.
In this case, for him, defending what the McCanns have said is defending is own point of view. Defending the McCanns is defending existence of the Tapas dinners, and in turn, that is to defend the OC Staff and the guests, those who Insane accuses us of "falsely accusing".
See the cul-de-sac in which Insane got himself in? If that the table is to be OVAL it contradicts not this blog, but Tanner and the two McCanns.
When we’ve said, and we’ve said it many times, the table #211 is BIG and ROUND, and we said it because the T9 have said that it was so.
What we’ve also said is that the BRT, as it is so BIG and so ROUND, it never existed.
But the shape of the thing is certainly not from our authorship.
And he’s not only contradicting the McCann, for that would be "acceptable" for him, as he likes to call them “McScum”, but he’s contradicting other Black Hats, like the very much missed Sidmouth:
“Just read the thread. They are trying to figure out where the staff would have got a large round table from… it’s there right at the back of the tapas… there’s three of them from memory. They are used for the children's dinner from the creche so all the kids can sit on the same table or two tables if need be. There are also larger table up above the pegolas to the side of the tapas where children can also be seated… There are lots of different size tables there anyway. (snickering emoticon)”
So Sidmouth, from MEMORY, sees not one, but FOUR ROUND tables, and not a single OVAL one… No wonder Sidmouth disappeared shortly after we denounced this comment to the world. But what is important to retain, is that he who does a TANNER tells us much more about himself then he ever intended to say.
As Jane Tanner did realize that to the point of tears on that chilly evening of 2009, where what she said she saw, and saw, on the street she wasn’t but said she was, helping a friend that proved to be everything but that, said so much more about herself then she ever intended for us to know…
That’s what happens to people who speak too much, and out of turn…
Post Scriptum: Thank you so much for you comment, Guerra. Sorry to have associated your name with a Black Hat such as Insane. Your comment is very valid and pertinent, as we hope to show on our next post.