"Four witnesses confirm Madeleine was alive at 5.30pm on Thursday 3rd May - so, shut up anyone who thinks the evidence says otherwise" - Blacksmith and an especially vicious attack on Lizzy HideHo

Tony Bennett wrote:Normally I would not bring Blacksmith's scatological, pompous and hate-filled ramblings to the forum, but I'm making an exception for today's offering:

sharonl wrote:
This blogger troll called Blacksmith is obviously one of these dummy friends, although we don't know what his personal reasons for covering up the actual date of Madeleines' death are.  All that I can say is ignore him, he writes a load of nonsense and in the scheme  of things he's probably just small fry.

Verdi wrote:3 He's a pompous, foul-mouthed egotist who's been wrong countless times and keeps on attacking those who've done the most research on the case

MayMuse wrote:Just veering off slightly...to Brian Kennedy...

We are led to believe that BK is/was a benefactor lulled into action by the plight of Madeleine? 
He was welcomed by the McCanns without question?
Yet his actions and money have been utilised as far as I can see, by "shady" dealings (Metodo 3 etc)
By all accounts it appears there was some form of interference eg. Meeting with Martin Smith and Robert Murat?

REPLY: Yes, we are off topic, but these are very good points you raise.
 
He is not an investigator of any kind, does not have experience in finding missing people etc yet stepped in to do what? His "generosity" has not brought any results, only highlighted fraudulent dealings? What was in it for him? A good deed, self promotion? Something more sinister? 

REPLY: More good points and questions.

Which brings me on to a few questions? 
Is there any evidence that he knew of the McCanns (or perhaps any of their group/family/friends)  prior to Madeleine going missing? 

REPLY: The account we are given in Kate's book, 'madeleine' (pages 268-270), runs like this. The McCanns flew back to Rothley on Sunday 9 September 2007. On Wednesday 12 September 2007, out of the blue so it is said, the McCanns were contacted by senior East Lancashire Freemason Edward Smethurst, a lawyer. He said he worked for Brian Kennedy who had been concerned about the McCanns' plight and wanted to help. Whatever the truth about this, on Friday 14 September a top London lawyer, Angus McBride, drove all the way up from London, collected the McCanns, and drove them down to a meeting in London where they met Brian Kennedy, allegedly for the first time, and a host of lawyers and public relations folk. At this meeting, it was agreed that Kennedy would run the private investigation and that Smethurst would be the McCanns' co-ordinating lawyer, which he has been ever since.

If that seems remarkably quick work to you, well it does to me as well.

There is no proof of Kennedy being involved before 12 September but there have been some indications that he was.

It is also an almighty coincidence that we know that Edward Smethurst had been holidaying every summer in Praia da Luz since 1999 with one or other of his three families (he has been married twice and had a mistress; he has two children by each).   
 
Why is he not on OG radar, he interfered with a "suspect" in the disappearance of Madeleine? 
Why haven't OG investigated those 'shady' goings on/ connections brought in by Mr Kennedy? 

REPLY: Simple. OG's remit doesn't allow them to go there. That's why Jill made such a big issue of this in her letter to Theresa May.   

Does anyone else think that Brian Kennedy's eager "participation" is questionable? 

REPLY: I think a great many members have thought exactlyh this over the past six-and-three-quarter years this forum has ben going.

MayMuse wrote:Just veering off slightly from Blacksmith to Brian Kennedy ( they do both begin with a B) 


We are led to believe that BK is/was a benefactor lulled into action by the plight of Madeleine? 
He was welcomed by the McCanns without question?
Yet his actions and money have been utilised as far as I can see, by "shady" dealings (Metodo 3, The Private Investigators Edgar/Cowley etc)
By all accounts it appears there was some form of interference eg. Meeting with Martin Smith and Robert Murat?
 

He is not an investigator of any kind, does not have experience in finding missing people etc yet stepped in to do what? His "generosity" has not brought any results, only highlighted fraudulent dealings? What was in it for him? A good deed, self promotion? Something more sinister? 

Which brings me on to a few questions? 
Is there any evidence that he knew of the McCanns ( or perhaps any of their group/family/friends)  prior to Madeleine going missing? 
Why is he not on OG radar, he interfered with a "suspect" in the disappearance of Madeleine? 

Why haven't OG investigated those 'shady' goings on/ connections brought in by Mr Kennedy? 

Does anyone else think that Brian Kennedy's eager "participation" is questionable? 


As for BlackSmith, I think it's all BS! 

IMO

JRP wrote:What an absolute waste of Web space that dross is, if it's got an audience wider than him I'd be amazed. 
Voted option 3

Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him. She only knows the children were quiet.

She remembers that during the afternoon of May 3 Madeleine was at the Mini Club, but she does not remember at what time she arrived, and if on that day Madeleine accompanied the other children at 1645 as was customary.

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:What an absolute waste of Web space that dross is, if it's got an audience wider than him I'd be amazed. 
Voted option 3

Well, he must be right because he says he is - who am I to argue!

I am aware of about half a dozen hard core members of this elite society of self proclaimed erudites - assuming them not one and the same, could be as they have the same style.  There are also a few acolytes with different reasons for lauding the blog - one, a blogger and forum foe, is an old time jezebel who takes every opportunity to slate this forum, in particular Mr. Bennett, if not directly these days then by encouraging others to do so.

The agenda has always been clear to me - to destroy the work and reputation of the people who have dedicated so much of their time and energy to uncovering the truth about Madeleine McCann.  The main target is always Tony Bennett, Jill Havern, HideHo, Hobs and this forum generally but it doesn't stop there - Goncalo Amaral, the PJ and even poor old Textusa are frequent targets of the self proclaimed erudites vitriol.

See the pattern?  That, in my opinion, is not the work of anyone whose concerns are for Madeleine McCann.

Still, one good thing to come out of all this, to coin a phrase, the forum must be doing something right  

JRP wrote:

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:What an absolute waste of Web space that dross is, if it's got an audience wider than him I'd be amazed. 
Voted option 3

Well, he must be right because he says he is - who am I to argue!

I am aware of about half a dozen hard core members of this elite society of self proclaimed erudites - assuming them not one and the same, could be as they have the same style.  There are also a few acolytes with different reasons for lauding the blog - one, a blogger and forum foe, is an old time jezebel who takes every opportunity to slate this forum, in particular Mr. Bennett, if not directly these days then by encouraging others to do so.

The agenda has always been clear to me - to destroy the work and reputation of the people who have dedicated so much of their time and energy to uncovering the truth about Madeleine McCann.  The main target is always Tony Bennett, Jill Havern, HideHo, Hobs and this forum generally but it doesn't stop there - Goncalo Amaral, the PJ and even poor old Textusa are frequent targets of the self proclaimed erudites vitriol.

See the pattern?  That, in my opinion, is not the work of anyone whose concerns are for Madeleine McCann.

Still, one good thing to come out of all this, to coin a phrase, the forum must be doing something right  

Are the four witnesses the McCanns, Cat Baker and Charlotte Pennington? Why not five? Why not the visiting doctor who visited Kate to see if eeerrm I can't quite remember what he wanted now. But no matter, neither could he. 
So maybe Blacksmith thinks he wasn't really there? Thats a "credible" witness who places Madeleine alive at 6pm. Or was it 6.30? 7pm? Details details. 

The problem is Verdi, that when their claims are complete bullsh*t and back fitting, it becomes very difficult to argue against facts, so they resort to spewing vitriol on those they see as the leaders, Tony, Jill, Hideho and others such as Richard Hall.

But there are many members here who contribute to interesting and factual debate, yourself included, and one day it will all pay off

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:What an absolute waste of Web space that dross is, if it's got an audience wider than him I'd be amazed. 
Voted option 3

Well, he must be right because he says he is - who am I to argue!

I am aware of about half a dozen hard core members of this elite society of self proclaimed erudites - assuming them not one and the same, could be as they have the same style.  There are also a few acolytes with different reasons for lauding the blog - one, a blogger and forum foe, is an old time jezebel who takes every opportunity to slate this forum, in particular Mr. Bennett, if not directly these days then by encouraging others to do so.

The agenda has always been clear to me - to destroy the work and reputation of the people who have dedicated so much of their time and energy to uncovering the truth about Madeleine McCann.  The main target is always Tony Bennett, Jill Havern, HideHo, Hobs and this forum generally but it doesn't stop there - Goncalo Amaral, the PJ and even poor old Textusa are frequent targets of the self proclaimed erudites vitriol.

See the pattern?  That, in my opinion, is not the work of anyone whose concerns are for Madeleine McCann.

Still, one good thing to come out of all this, to coin a phrase, the forum must be doing something right  

Are the four witnesses the McCanns, Cat Baker and Charlotte Pennington? Why not five? Why not the visiting doctor who visited Kate to see if eeerrm I can't quite remember what he wanted now. But no matter, neither could he. 
So maybe Blacksmith thinks he wasn't really there? Thats a "credible" witness who places Madeleine alive at 6pm. Or was it 6.30? 7pm? Details details. 

The problem is Verdi, that when their claims are complete bullsh*t and back fitting, it becomes very difficult to argue against facts, so they resort to spewing vitriol on those they see as the leaders, Tony, Jill, Hideho and others such as Richard Hall.

But there are many members here who contribute to interesting and factual debate, yourself included, and one day it will all pay off

I apologize profusely - off the top of my head I didn't include Richard D. Hall or PeterMac, who's had his fair share of vitriol overthe years.  There are probably others so forgive me if I've neglected anyone.

Would that be the missing doctor who paid that haunting visitation to Ms Healy, she enwrapped in towel, to check her credentials - either that or her pulse!

Yep, that's the usual form - can't come up with the goods so lash out with abuse.  Pathetic!

JRP wrote:

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:

Verdi wrote:

JRP wrote:What an absolute waste of Web space that dross is, if it's got an audience wider than him I'd be amazed. 
Voted option 3

Well, he must be right because he says he is - who am I to argue!

I am aware of about half a dozen hard core members of this elite society of self proclaimed erudites - assuming them not one and the same, could be as they have the same style.  There are also a few acolytes with different reasons for lauding the blog - one, a blogger and forum foe, is an old time jezebel who takes every opportunity to slate this forum, in particular Mr. Bennett, if not directly these days then by encouraging others to do so.

The agenda has always been clear to me - to destroy the work and reputation of the people who have dedicated so much of their time and energy to uncovering the truth about Madeleine McCann.  The main target is always Tony Bennett, Jill Havern, HideHo, Hobs and this forum generally but it doesn't stop there - Goncalo Amaral, the PJ and even poor old Textusa are frequent targets of the self proclaimed erudites vitriol.

See the pattern?  That, in my opinion, is not the work of anyone whose concerns are for Madeleine McCann.

Still, one good thing to come out of all this, to coin a phrase, the forum must be doing something right  

Are the four witnesses the McCanns, Cat Baker and Charlotte Pennington? Why not five? Why not the visiting doctor who visited Kate to see if eeerrm I can't quite remember what he wanted now. But no matter, neither could he. 
So maybe Blacksmith thinks he wasn't really there? Thats a "credible" witness who places Madeleine alive at 6pm. Or was it 6.30? 7pm? Details details. 

The problem is Verdi, that when their claims are complete bullsh*t and back fitting, it becomes very difficult to argue against facts, so they resort to spewing vitriol on those they see as the leaders, Tony, Jill, Hideho and others such as Richard Hall.

But there are many members here who contribute to interesting and factual debate, yourself included, and one day it will all pay off

I apologize profusely - off the top of my head I didn't include Richard D. Hall or PeterMac, who's had his fair share of vitriol overthe years.  There are probably others so forgive me if I've neglected anyone.

Would that be the missing doctor who paid that haunting visitation to Ms Healy, she enwrapped in towel, to check her credentials - either that or her pulse!

Yep, that's the usual form - can't come up with the goods so lash out with abuse.  Pathetic!

That is he, a man who struggled with the word towel. But hey, perhaps he was never there, like the illusive pimpernel.


OK so now I'm going to ask you to recollect what everybody was wearing. 

David Payne: I'm afraid that is, you know I'm, I cannot recall at all. You know that's, you'd think that was an obvious thing to remember. I cannot remember, as I say the, from the children point of view predominantly, I can remember the, you know, white, but I couldn't say exactly what they were wearing.... eeer 

Could you remember what Kate was wearing for example?

David Payne: I can't, no!

HiDeHo wrote:I CHALLENGE anyone to find a statement that could be considered PROOF that Madeleine was alive during the week... Was Madeleine seen after SUNDAY?

I did not come to the conclusion that something may have happened to her earlier in the week on a whim... I discovered some MAJOR discrepancies started happening on Tuesday and researched all the statements to try to pinpoint the day she was last seen... SUNDAY LUNCHTIME!

I have TWO VERY LONG threads collating some of the research. I don't 'guess' I worked hard to try to find ANYTHING that I considered proof... In 6 years or more, I have NEVER found anything...

Note: It doesn't mean she wasn't seen, but there is nothing to prove she was!

1) Title: People that saw Madeleine during the holiday
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/WELCOME-to-HDH-Controversy-Info/People-that-saw-Madeleine-during-the-holiday-1-2344234.html

2) Title: Did ANYONE see Madeleine during the holiday?
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/category/Did-ANYONE-see-Madeleine-during-the-holiday-1-2344239.html

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/527143374108823/

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:I wonder why he doesn't allow comments on his blog?

HiDeHo wrote:

PLEASE NOTE:

I DO NOT claim that Madeleine died earlier in the week only that SOMETHING HAPPENED.

Fatima saw her Sunday lunchtime and discrepancies started Tuesday morning.

From that I CONCLUDED the possibility/probability that something happened earlier.

I do NOT know when she died

Only that she did (according to the police files)