STINK BOMBS

We have exposed and explained one of the most important and recurrent phenomenon that afflicts all related to Maddie: CLUTTER. 

How and why CLUTTER was and is implanted and how very effective it is. This was done in our post “Clutter - From Here to TIMBUCKTOO” (08Nov2010). 

All we have to do is to think how great and popularly ingrained is the relationship between the words “McCann” and “negligence” to get the idea.

But almost from the start, together with the CLUTTER, we have had another phenomenon that we are continuously bombarded with and which is easily mistaken for CLUTTER: STINK BOMBS.

STINK BOMBS or So Truth Is Not Known - Bring On More Barmy Stories.

An example of one of these STINK BOMBS: Gerry, in May 2007, went back to Rothley to get Maddie’s DNA so that he could plant evidence in the Scenic so he could blame Kate.

They are easily recognisable but, as we said, are and have been easily mistaken for CLUTTER.

What is the difference between CLUTTER and STINK BOMBS? Your logic.

Nothing to do with the way you think or with the way you align your ideas but the way your logic is treated.

CLUTTER pampers your logic. It takes it to a candlelight dinner, pulls the chair and woos it with a nice wine and some romantic background music.

STINK BOMBS are violent with your logic. They grab by the collar and slap logic's face once or twice. They are rude and aggressive to it. They insult it. They demean it.

CLUTTER wants to pass information as truthful.

STINK BOMBS are intended to clear a room and in this case, blogs or forums in order to show how Internet sites were set up by deranged people.

CLUTTER needs to fool you, STINK BOMBS just want to drive you away.

CLUTTER has to be logical, STINK BOMBS couldn’t care less. CLUTTER may be nonsensical, STINK BOMBS are just ridiculous.

CLUTTER needs investigation for its falsity to be discovered while STINK BOMBS need to be investigated so any truth can be seen in them.

CLUTTER , once revealed always produces the same “oh” reaction like in “Oh, I see now”, “Oh, now I get it”, “Oh, so that’s why…”

STINK BOMBS once said always produce the same “pff” reaction, like in “yeah, right… pff”.

If they could be measured CLUTTER would be in “Ohs” and STINK BOMBS in “Pffs”, for example, Maddie’s crying episode would be a 100 Oh CLUTTER while Birch’s thesis of having Maddie under Murat’s driveway would be one of those STINK BOMBS with a minimum 1,500 Pff magnitude.

Both CLUTTER and STINK BOMBS share one common thing: they both STINK, as in So Truth Is Not Known.

Don’t confuse reactions with content. 

A “Pff” reaction doesn’t always necessarily mean that one is presented with STINK BOMBS. It may well be CLUTTER.

Black Hats (BH) and “White Hats” (“WH”) will always react with a “pff” whenever CLUTTER is unveiled.

Why? Because once CLUTTER is revealed they will want immediately that you mistake it for STINK BOMBS.

CLUTTER simply cannot be revealed as what really is: CLUTTER .   

It was put in place to fool you so if revealed it will also reveal the reasons for its existence. If it’s there, then the next logical question is why is it there? 

The only way to make something very real to be taken as unreal is to ridicule it. All has to be done to transform what are not STINK BOMBS into one.

Take the BRT. The fact that there is no BRT begs the question, why is there a BRT? Why was it invented? Why was this invention confirmed by Ocean Club and guests?

The only way to stop short this logical sequencing of questions is to bully the questioning of existence. Make it a dogma that the BRT exists and bully into ridiculousness anyone who dares doubt that.

And how is that done? Either by not discussing it or by offensive jesting. Once again we recommend revisiting the “Textusa Meltdown” post to see the last technique for yourself.

There was no BRT? Now that is absolutely ridiculous… didn’t all the waiters testify they served the T9? And what about the Tapas reservation sheets… are you going to be beyond stupid and start saying they’re forged? Are you being absurd to the point of saying that ALL Tapas staff would lie to help a couple they didn’t know from anywhere? You need you head examined. To believe that there was no BRT is to believe that every single cockroach, every single lizard, every single ladybug and every single bird species in the Algarve such as all the Muscovy Ducks, all the Whooper Swans, all the Northern Shovelers, all the Ring-necked Ducks, all the Marbled Teals and all the Red-crested Pochards had to be “in on it”. Don’t be ridiculous… pff.

CLUTTER cannot be detected. It’s there not to be detected. Once detected it HAS to be ridiculous. That’s why it provokes an immediate adamant “pff”. Not exactly adamant, more as in desperate.

The not discussing technique, is obviously harder to see but it is there to be seen. It reels you back into your geeky high school days by setting you aside. By “ignoring” your ideas then you're not part of the “popular group”.

Do not underestimate the damage caused by these “self-appointed-and-anointed-truth-representatives”. They hold truth hostage for now. Fortunately, the three of us are a well balanced mixture of geeky and nerdy bookworms who find “high-school popularity” highly overrated. 

Do note that all “pffs” from uncluttered CLUTTER come only from BH and “WH”.

But there are instances in which CLUTTER will merit a “pff” from a genuine WH. 

Things that are absolutely ridiculous but are not STINK BOMBS but CLUTTER.

That happens when the ridiculousness is not intentional. 

As we said, STINK BOMBS are always intentionally ridiculous. Intention is fundamental when it comes to STINK BOMBS.

CLUTTER may be ridiculous but that's because it has resulted from a poor choice of options, words and/or intervening people.

Let us give you some examples.

Mrs Fenn’s crying episode is ridiculous in terms of having a little girl of 4 yrs, who was supposed to have been checked upon every 15 minutes, crying for 75 minutes and, by sheer miracle, to stop doing it just as her parents were arriving home but is CLUTTER to reinforce the idea of the McCanns being negligent.

The jemmied window is ridiculous in any way one looks at it but was CLUTTER to pass the idea that Maddie was abducted and thus didn’t die inside the apartment.

TS’s sightings of Pimpleman are ridiculous in what she does and what she says she's able to see but is CLUTTER to convey the idea that there was a stranger lurking over the McCanns.

Derek Flack is ridiculous in everything he says but is CLUTTER to confirm that there was a Pimpleman and that he probably was Guitarman, a CLUTTER-character brought up by Gerry McCann in his phoney McCann trip to the beach based on a real life character.

The Tapas Reservation Sheets are ridiculous as one cannot even understand what were they for (except to deceive, of course) but are CLUTTER to confirm the Tapas dinners.

The crèche records are ridiculous but are CLUTTER just to prove that only those children used the service that week.

As can be seen, all of the above is ridiculous, all of the above is CLUTTER and none are STINK BOMBS.

They all had a logical and understandable purpose. Their ridiculousness wasn’t intentional.

Back to STINK BOMBS. The Maddie case is filled with them.

Many STINK BOMBS have been thrown at us by the media: the many, many sightings, the many “ugly-mug” lurkers, the gypsies, the “Barcelona-Victoria”, the Brazilian family, the Birch BS (as in Best Shot), the Tractorman, the “10 Km from PdL Lair”, the burglar trio and lately the Busy Binman.

Some are said to be coming from SY, namely tractorman and the burglar trio, but up to now it has only been the media saying that SY said so.

Besides Binman, who ranks high among STINK BOMBS, the only other real palpable piece of ridiculousness coming from SY is Crèche Dad, and we’re still waiting to see if it’s CLUTTER or STINK BOMBS. Up to now we only know it stinks.

But what worries us are the STINK BOMBS from the “inside”. People who say they only want to find the truth but throw STINK BOMBS about. People who say they just came to smell the roses while throwing all around manure.

We have come with a list of STINK BOMBS. Not in any particular order, just the one that came to our mind:

STINK BOMBS #1 – The Big Secret

STINK BOMBS #2 – The Sub-Girl

STINK BOMBS #3 – Maddie, the Clone

STINK BOMBS #4 – Death Before the 3rd

STINK BOMBS #5 – Plastered McCanns

STINK BOMBS #6 – The Sick Maddie

STINK BOMBS #7 – The Chipping

STINK BOMBS #8 – The Sold/Given Maddie

STINK BOMBS #9 – The Paedo Ring

STINK BOMBS #10 – The Devaluation

STINK BOMBS #11 – Planting DNA

STINK BOMBS #12 – The Secret Societies

STINK BOMBS #13 – Maddie Never Existed

We have listed 13 STINK BOMBS. If we have overlooked any, we apologise.

We won't detail each in the current post, we intend to do so later.

All ridiculous. None invented by us as you know but out there. And we have noticed old chestnuts being recycled recently.

Now add to these the ones we have disregarded in this post, those coming from the media. Now you have an approximate idea of the disinformation aggregated in this case.

But that's only the STINK BOMBS. Pile on them the misinformation from the whole CLUTTER that this case has and you have an idea of what we, fighting the counter-information frontline, are up against.

The cherry on top of this gigantic cake of deceit are the Eco-friendly Newbies.  

“New” posters presenting old newspaper articles as if they were current news, then responding , oops, sorry, I'm new and didn't realise! - when caught out.

If STINK BOMBS are always ridiculous, stink-bombers certainly aren’t. On the contrary. Believe us, no matter how much they may appear to be ridiculous, they are not.

STINK BOMBS, like all bombs, come in different sizes and effects. Some are blatantly gross and illogical because their intent is to cause immediate repulsion. Their purpose: to keep newcomers away.

Spectacular STINK BOMBS are meant to be noticed, aimed to discredit all those interested in the truth about Maddie... To fatally wound the cause of searching for the truth as to what happened on that night

Their use has been very effective. How many of us have openly stated in our circle of friends that we’re Maddie truth-fighters?  Why haven’t we? Because we fear with anticipation a coveted “yeah, right… pff” reaction. 

Not because we’re ashamed of ourselves, which we aren’t, but because we are fully aware that Maddie has become a “STINK BOMBS issue” to the general public.

But there are STINK BOMBS intended to cause long lasting effects. They avoid being spectacular.

These are launched by expert stink-bombers (ESB). The ESB’s STINK BOMBS are placed and timed very carefully.

An ESB works very hard to create a “credibility” aura around him or herself. This takes time and effort. And seriousness.

Once s/he is taken for a credible poster, it’s time to act. To drop here and there a small and almost imperceptible STINK BOMBS. Always ever so subtly.

For example, s/he makes a list of two dozen things which in his/her opinion, points to Maddie’s death.

Of the list, two thirds will be not only absolutely correct but are absolutely consensual among those familiar with the case. Things that are proved. A qualified majority of two thirds, 18, of rightfulness.

Then of the remainder 6, s/he states 5 things are not proved but taken as certain. The 6th, one of those STINK BOMBS. Something ridiculous but that doesn’t overdo it. Nothing relevant, yet absurd. Nothing too controversial, just wrong. The idea is to have it surrounded by other 23 very consensual facts.

What happens is the unaware reader, absorbing all “credible” information from a “credible source” then notices that one thing that will seem odd.

The reader will find it strange how a “credible source” does believe in this particular nonsense.

The intended reaction is to spark in the reader series of questions all around “credibility”.

If this one premise is absurd, as it indeed is, the reader will begin to doubt the credibility of the other 23 things listed. If such a credible poster believes in it how can then the reader trust if the other 23 are indeed credible and not just absurd as that one thing?

If the reader stops trusting the credibility of this poster, anything else this poster has subscribed to is questioned.

And if this credible poster can no longer be trusted, what other credible posters out there can be trusted then?

And if one cannot know who is credible then how can one trust what one reads about the subject? One can't.

So simple and so effective. They do it slowly and be silly while doing it. And by being silly they make us all look silly.

Our blog is has been often victim of various ESB.

People who set themselves up as full supporters of the blog. Link themselves solidly with the blog. Once that is achieved then, subtly twist information.

Not only by misquoting us but mainly by implanting error with their own words. They are linked, by their own doing, with the blog so what does the reader think? If this person, a firm believer of Textusa, takes this absurdity for real then it’s because Textusa has sometime said it. If one cannot believe this person how can one believe in Textusa? 

A way of undermining our credibility by having our name falsely linked to STINK BOMBS.

Again, very simple and very effective.

More dangerous than a wolf in sheep’s skin is one in owl’s feathers.

That’s why through time we have become wary of some overenthusiastic supporters. We've seen before how some try to use our information and twist it.

Only the 3 of us represent Textusa. And we represent it here and here only.

Do we reject supporters? Of course not and, obviously, nor are ESB all our enthusiastic supporters.

Unfortunately experience has shown that being a friend of the blog doesn't necessarily mean to be a friend of the truth but fortunately it has also shown us that friends of the truth are always friends of the blog.