Re: Er...mr Bennett....

by scrafen 02.12.09 18:41

Majic wrote:
scrafen wrote:

have you ever requested a forum to be removed from the net ?

have you ever requested someone to be removed from a forum ?

Yes, I have asked authorities to remove websites from the net. No, I don't ask for members be removed from a forum, I contact the administrator and put what I have to them, it is then their choice whether to act on it or not.

so and ? you did the same thing as bennett.

you are accusing others of stuff, which seems pretty ok as long as you are doing it.

and you - are doing much worse than them :

- requesting the removal of posters, which you dont like
- spamming porn and porn links on forum
- defamation of posters (the porn-photos - NO proof that they are from jjp)
- stalking posters !

roll

majic, you are by far the worst porn spammer and stalker around !

by Guest 02.12.09 19:47

Hear Hear Scrafen - well said!

About time the truth was known.

Hypocrites - the lot of them.

by aiyoyo 03.12.09 13:05

Chicane wrote:Mr Bennett is not a victim here. Sadly, the victim is Madeleine.

TB is a victim of harrassement. If amber and debbie allegations have substance then it should be given to police to handle period, and not spread over the internet. What they did amount to harrassement.

Madeleine is a victim, YES, but of what no body knows for sure.
No evidence of an abductor - so what's left? And,her parents behaviors are odd to say the least.

by Guest 03.12.09 13:14

aiyoyo wrote:
Chicane wrote:Mr Bennett is not a victim here. Sadly, the victim is Madeleine.

TB is a victim of harrassement. If amber and debbie allegations have substance then it should be given to police to handle period, and not spread over the internet. What they did amount to harrassement.

Madeleine is a victim, YES, but of what no body knows for sure.
No evidence of an abductor - so what's left? And,her parents behaviors are odd to say the least.

The McCanns are victims of harrassement. And as you say, "Nobody knows".

We all know that Mr. Bennett has harrassed The McCanns. There is nothing even remotely "Victim" about him.

by aiyoyo 03.12.09 13:28

Sabot wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Chicane wrote:Mr Bennett is not a victim here. Sadly, the victim is Madeleine.

TB is a victim of harrassement. If amber and debbie allegations have substance then it should be given to police to handle period, and not spread over the internet. What they did amount to harrassement.

Madeleine is a victim, YES, but of what no body knows for sure.
No evidence of an abductor - so what's left? And,her parents behaviors are odd to say the least.

The McCanns are victims of harrassement. And as you say, "Nobody knows".

We all know that Mr. Bennett has harrassed The McCanns. There is nothing even remotely "Victim" about him.

Well, the mccanns admitted to leaving their 3 children HOME ALONE in a foreign country!! And what were they doing meanwhile?

I dont feel they were harrassed.

If you think they were, they were asking for it by leaving 3 children below 4 years old ALONE in the DARK!

What did they expect? Left the child alone, then span some yarn and expect people to buy it hook liner sinker - no questions asked? NO WAY HOSEY!

by Guest 03.12.09 14:17

aiyoyo wrote:
Sabot wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Chicane wrote:Mr Bennett is not a victim here. Sadly, the victim is Madeleine.

TB is a victim of harrassement. If amber and debbie allegations have substance then it should be given to police to handle period, and not spread over the internet. What they did amount to harrassement.

Madeleine is a victim, YES, but of what no body knows for sure.
No evidence of an abductor - so what's left? And,her parents behaviors are odd to say the least.

The McCanns are victims of harrassement. And as you say, "Nobody knows".

We all know that Mr. Bennett has harrassed The McCanns. There is nothing even remotely "Victim" about him.

Well, the mccanns admitted to leaving their 3 children HOME ALONE in a foreign country!! And what were they doing meanwhile?

I dont feel they were harrassed.

If you think they were, they were asking for it by leaving 3 children below 4 years old ALONE in the DARK!

What did they expect? Left the child alone, then span some yarn and expect people to buy it hook liner sinker - no questions asked? NO WAY HOSEY!

God, not that old chestnut again. It is no excuse for someone to come in and steal a child. Unless you think it is, of course.

I presume that you have your children tied to your apron strings 24 hours a day, in which case you deserve a Sainthood.

by Guest 03.12.09 14:27

Sabot,

Yes, that old chestnut again. Boring isn't it? It is absoutely fundamental to the case though isn't it. If those kiddies were not left alone then all 3 would still be here. Do you agree??

So you would leave your house, unlocked with all your valuables in, then say it's no excuse for someone to come in and steal them?? Your insurance company and the police would laugh at you!!

by Guest 03.12.09 14:54

candyfloss wrote:Sabot,

Yes, that old chestnut again. Boring isn't it? It is absoutely fundamental to the case though isn't it. If those kiddies were not left alone then all 3 would still be here. Do you agree??

So you would leave your house, unlocked with all your valuables in, then say it's no excuse for someone to come in and steal them?? Your insurance company and the police would laugh at you!!

It's boring because it is so ridiculous to think that someone is asking for their child to be abducted because they only checked them every half hour compared to someone who sleeps in the same bed as their child.

Madeleine was abducted because someone entered her bedroom and took her, she wasn't abducted because her parents were not in the same room, otherwise 99% of children would be abducted by strangers.

The police would still consider it a crime that someone entered your house and took your belongings because newsflash, that IS a crime, leaving a door unlocked is not!

by Guest 03.12.09 14:55

candyfloss wrote:Sabot,

Yes, that old chestnut again. Boring isn't it? It is absoutely fundamental to the case though isn't it. If those kiddies were not left alone then all 3 would still be here. Do you agree??

So you would leave your house, unlocked with all your valuables in, then say it's no excuse for someone to come in and steal them?? Your insurance company and the police would laugh at you!!

No, I do not agree. If someone had been determined to steal Madeleine then they would have done so. And if she had been taken in the middle of the night I expect someone would have accused The McCanns of being in a drunken stupour. Or have accused them anyway. So much more easy to cover up a crime in the middle of the night, don't you think? This isn't about The McCanns leaving their children for half an hour between checks. It's about getting The McCanns at any cost because they are attractive and clever and better off financially than some.

So you think that if I left my house unlocked I would be responsible for a thief who stole my property? What a very twisted attitude. Insurance Companies will sink to any depths to avoid paying. I don't know about the police any more, but I might hope that they would endeavour to find the culprit and send him to prison despite my own apparent stupidity.

by Guest 03.12.09 15:14

Sabot wrote
It's about getting The McCanns at any cost because they are attractive and clever and better off financially than some.

So you think that if I left my house unlocked I would be responsible for a thief who stole my property? What a very twisted attitude

Do you realise how silly your first comment re the McCanns is?? How childish. And no, it's not a twisted attitude, but a sensible one that most people observe. That is that YOU and you alone are responsible for your property, car, and of course most importantly your children.

by **Tony Bennett** 03.12.09 15:18

candyfloss wrote:...YOU and you alone are responsible for your property, car, and of course most importantly your children.

If you leave your home unlocked and there's a break-in, or as I should put it more accurately, a 'walk-in', and then a theft, your insurance company won't pay up.

by Guest 03.12.09 15:36

Tony Bennett wrote:
candyfloss wrote:...YOU and you alone are responsible for your property, car, and of course most importantly your children.
If you leave your home unlocked and there's a break-in, or as I should put it more accurately, a 'walk-in', and then a theft, your insurance company won't pay up.

Please don't tell me you are comparing the abduction of a child and a police response to that crime to someone stealing a bit of property? It's incomparable Mr Bennett, insurance is purchased in order to replace things like for like or a monetary value, a child is priceless.

And the police investigate crimes, for which which illegally entering a property and taking something away, qualifies. A crime Mr Bennett, please pick when to spin and when to just accept that you are talking rubbish.

by MaryB 03.12.09 15:41

Didn't Gerry McCann compare finding Madeleine gone to finding he had no money in his bank account. Wasn't that a little insensitive. Or was he talking rubbish.

by Guest 03.12.09 15:44

candyfloss wrote:Sabot wrote
It's about getting The McCanns at any cost because they are attractive and clever and better off financially than some.

So you think that if I left my house unlocked I would be responsible for a thief who stole my property? What a very twisted attitude

Do you realise how silly your first comment re the McCanns is?? How childish. And no, it's not a twisted attitude, but a sensible one that most people observe. That is that YOU and you alone are responsible for your property, car, and of course most importantly your children.

Nonsense. Criminals are responsible for Crime.

by Guest 03.12.09 15:44

MaryB wrote:Didn't Gerry McCann compare finding Madeleine gone to finding he had no money in his bank account. Wasn't that a little insensitive. Or was he talking rubbish.

Nope, third option, you are misled/misunderstood, he did no such thing.

He was referring to his emotional energy and feeling he couldn't go on and then getting a surge of energy that helped him become focussed, it was an analogy.

For anyone to suggest their child going missing was like having no money in the bank would be frankly insane and disturbing.

by Guest 03.12.09 15:51

clarity wrote:
MaryB wrote:Didn't Gerry McCann compare finding Madeleine gone to finding he had no money in his bank account. Wasn't that a little insensitive. Or was he talking rubbish.

Nope, third option, you are misled/misunderstood, he did no such thing.

He was referring to his emotional energy and feeling he couldn't go on and then getting a surge of energy that helped him become focussed, it was an analogy.

For anyone to suggest their child going missing was like having no money in the bank would be frankly insane and disturbing.

What about whoever she's with she will be giving her twopennce worth, and

the situation Madeleine finds herself in

by Guest 03.12.09 15:57

candyfloss wrote:
clarity wrote:
MaryB wrote:Didn't Gerry McCann compare finding Madeleine gone to finding he had no money in his bank account. Wasn't that a little insensitive. Or was he talking rubbish.

Nope, third option, you are misled/misunderstood, he did no such thing.

He was referring to his emotional energy and feeling he couldn't go on and then getting a surge of energy that helped him become focussed, it was an analogy.

For anyone to suggest their child going missing was like having no money in the bank would be frankly insane and disturbing.

What about whoever she's with she will be giving her twopennce worth, and

the situation Madeleine finds herself in

Given someone her tuppence worth refers to her being full of life and determined little girl, that statement was one of the most heart rending statements throughout this whole sad affair as it gives a real taste of her personality, it instantly conjures up a real child with personality rather than a one dimensional image on the tv screen, how loved she was and of course for viewers it hurts to think about her being in a horrible situation, doesn't it, think how much worse it is for her flesh and blood and people that know/knew her.

The situation she finds herself in can only be speculated about, none of us knows for sure if she is even still alive or if she was hurt physically and if she is alive, how much emotional damage she has experienced, how would you describe the situation in which she finds herself unless you know?

by MaryB 03.12.09 16:00

How indeed?

by Guest 03.12.09 16:04

MaryB wrote:How indeed?

Exactly, so any speculation by her parents, or by us will always be just that, speculation, we can hope that if she is alive that she is being looked after well while simultaneously knowing that the chances of that are slim and in fact she is more likely to have suffered but we don't know for sure. 'The situation in which Madeleine finds herself' sadly sums up every aspect of the unknown, the horror of the possibilities and the slim hopes in one sentence that are just so sad.

Most parents would be distressed not to know what their children are doing for an afternoon, I can't even comprehend how families of missing children get through years of not knowing and how they find ways to stop their minds going to that terrible place ... just awful.

by Guest 03.12.09 16:20

clarity wrote:
MaryB wrote:How indeed?

Exactly, so any speculation by her parents, or by us will always be just that, speculation, we can hope that if she is alive that she is being looked after well while simultaneously knowing that the chances of that are slim and in fact she is more likely to have suffered but we don't know for sure. 'The situation in which Madeleine finds herself' sadly sums up every aspect of the unknown, the horror of the possibilities and the slim hopes in one sentence that are just so sad.

Most parents would be distressed not to know what their children are doing for an afternoon, I can't even comprehend how families of missing children get through years of not knowing and how they find ways to stop their minds going to that terrible place ... just awful.

But children do survive this. I try not to think of the worst side of this, which is probably what The McCanns are doing. Anything to keep going. It's called "Hope".

by maebee 03.12.09 21:11

I can't even comprehend how families of missing children get through years of not knowing and how they find ways to stop their minds going to that terrible place ... just awful.

They go jogging, blogging and globetrotting.

by **Tony Bennett** 03.12.09 22:35

maebee wrote:They go jogging, blogging and globetrotting.

And spend a million quid on the services of Francisco Marco ("She'll be home by Christmas") and Kevin Halligen (hic)

by Guest 03.12.09 22:37

And you Bennett have done what exactly? Except lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, lie, harass, harass, harass,

by **Tony Bennett** 03.12.09 22:53

murat_fan wrote:And you Bennett have done what exactly? Except lie,

Told people about what Martin Grime's dogs Eddie and Keela alerted to

lie,

Explained to people the problems of the abduction scenario, e.g. no forensic evidence, narrow time frame

lie,

Informed people about the dodgy nature of most of the McCanns' private investigators

lie,

Unfolded to people the changing stories of Jane Tanner

lie,

Noted how from the early days the McCanns were making long-term plans to mark the anniversaries of Madeleine's disappearance, supplying quotes

lie,

Told people how Dr Gerald McCann said that finding Madeleine missing was 'like going to the bank and finding yourself over on your student overdraft'

harass,

Set out a list of contradictions and changes of story

harass,

Outlined failures to co-operate with the Portuguese Police

harass,

Listed some of the many strange aspects of the McCanns' body language

by Guest 03.12.09 23:15

Not to mention the outright lies and libel Mr Bennett.

And this one from a post you made yesterday

Eddie discovering the scent of death on two of Dr Kate McCann' clothes is suggestive of her being in contact with a dead Madeleine at some point, although the
McCanns would say that these dogs are useless and they rely very much
of course on Martin Grime saying that corroborative evidence is needed