Textusa..."The Great Maddie War"

by marxman 25.01.13 15:42

A very long and interesting post, well worth a read,

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by russiandoll 03.02.13 18:20

A lot from tex. is well worth a read, but for those who don't enjoy listening to a person who talks in riddles it is convoluted and very dense.
I have noticed in recent days tex and her most loyal readers and contributors have been very upset and annoyed at posts esp. on MM forum which seem to be mocking her style.
I did not make a critical post, but I was rather surprised and disappointed to see more than one post among many that were critical of disruptors and critical of posters trying to muddy the waters with bizarre theories , Kikoratton being targeted over his sub theory; he was not named but I do believe it is Kiko who first suggested it. I did not defend the sub theory, but defended his right to suggest it because he has done a hell of a ot of research and out of a motivation to get to the truth and obtain justice.
My polite post was rewarded with not being published and when I asked why not I received a curt " Please take your theory to a blog which would welcome it or publish it on your own."

So they will publish attacks but not anything in defence of a well- meaning and hardworking researcher who wants truth and justice, simply it would seem because they find it outlandish. I did not even get an acknowledgment that I never once stated agreement with Kiko... but I am criticised for defending his right to his conclusion !
Last time I will be posting there !!

by Inspectorfrost 03.02.13 18:32

I read her three years ago when much made some sense but in recent times nothing makes sense

She is similar to a poster called thentherewere4

Time wasters and paranoids and fear mongers

Both NOT backingup some of their ludicrous claims

if textusa has something important to say she should spit it out and say it in terms that most compus mentus people can understand, whats stopping her
lol!

by Nina 03.02.13 18:45

Inspectorfrost wrote:I read her three years ago when much made some sense but in recent times nothing makes sense

She is similar to a poster called thentherewere4

Time wasters and paranoids and fear mongers

Both NOT backingup some of their ludicrous claims

if textusa has something important to say she should spit it out and say it in terms that most compus mentus people can understand, whats stopping her

Fear of litigation maybe.

by Inspectorfrost 03.02.13 18:50

Nina wrote:
Inspectorfrost wrote:I read her three years ago when much made some sense but in recent times nothing makes sense

She is similar to a poster called thentherewere4K

Time wasters and paranoids and fear mongers

Both NOT backingup some of their ludicrous claims

if textusa has something important to say she should spit it out and say it in terms that most compus mentus people can understand, whats stopping her

Fear of litigation maybe.

LOL hardly the woman is mad

she has posted the most ridiculous things its a no brainer

by CarolIne Ray 03.02.13 18:54

Very hard to make sense of? (hopefully that's not just me being thick!)

by Mirage 03.02.13 19:02

CarolIne Ray wrote:Very hard to make sense of? (hopefully that's not just me being thick!)

Sadly, I have to agree on this occasion, Caroline. I'm afraid Textusa lost me on this one and it all was too much hard work. As Russian Doll said, it was dense. I read it the other day and I, too, concluded I was being thick.

Plaudits to her though for past triumphs.

by russiandoll 03.02.13 19:07

While I found the latest piece very hard work, my real gripe is with the slating of Kiko by a few of her fans and not even an insinuation but a claim that he is out to muddy the waters with rubbish theories. I defended his hard work regardless of any agreement or not with his theory re a sub.
It is clear from the 2 replies to me that nothing in his defence will be published, I think it very unfair to accuse Kiko of cluttering up the Maddie debate with nonsense, especially when Tex own theory is the world and his wife are in on a cover up over swinging .

by Guest 03.02.13 19:10

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I definitely haven't got the stamina to read through a whole Textusa blog any more.

by CarolIne Ray 03.02.13 19:12

Jean wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I definitely haven't got the stamina to read through a whole Textusa blog any more.

Hi Jean - I've tried a time or two but can't really understand it? Again, probably just me being thick?

by Guest 03.02.13 19:14

Well, if you are, so am I!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest 03.02.13 19:17

russiandoll wrote:While I found the latest piece very hard work, my real gripe is with the slating of Kiko by a few of her fans and not even an insinuation but a claim that he is out to muddy the waters with rubbish theories. I defended his hard work regardless of any agreement or not with his theory re a sub.
It is clear from the 2 replies to me that nothing in his defence will be published, I think it very unfair to accuse Kiko of cluttering up the Maddie debate with nonsense, especially when Tex own theory is the world and his wife are in on a cover up over swinging .

What do you mean russiandoll, no-one has replied in his defence so far.

by russiandoll 03.02.13 20:20

Sorry if I wasn't clear in my posts CF, I replied politely and briefly in defence of Kiko, my reply was not published. When I asked why not I got the abrupt message I posted earlier, which WAS published, to take MY theory elsewhere.
I did not present any theory, I simply stated that criticism of Kiko was unfair as he is not imo trying to muddy waters with nonsense theories as some of tex's fans posted re the sub child. He has done a lot of work whether you agree with him or not.

So the posts critical of " sub child" nonsense and clutter remain on the blog.
Both of mine were replied to but not published.
I was in essence told to take a hike for defending him !

by monkey mind 03.02.13 20:57

Two or three people have some serious questions to answer about those crèche records. Until those questions are put and answers received no conclusions can be drawn, until that moment all possibilities are open. To simply dismiss them because it does not fit one’s view is naive and dangerous. Time and again in this case there are examples of people manipulating the facts to fit their theory rather than remaining open and allowing the theory to shape itself around the facts as known. Squeezing facts to fit ill conceived theories has been the cause of many a miscarriage of justice.

And to dismiss the records simply as being rewrites or doctored after the fact (no pun intended) is an illustration that one has neither considered nor studied them closely enough.

by russiandoll 03.02.13 21:23

my last post re Textusa as I have sent my last message to her because I was very angry to see a lengthy reply to me in public when my own post was not shown...where is the balance in that?
I have told this person twice that I am not defending a theory and even if I am disinclined to accept some of her theories I would protest at abusive posts calling her ridiculous or a disruptor of serious debate.

She refers to me as the person responsible for the sub theory or a close collaborator on it...neither is correct.
I have informed her [ again this will not be published and I am not wasting my energy now looking for a reply from her..] that I would have defended her right to a theory which appeared based on hard work and facts.

She has insulted Kiko even more now by including this in her published reply to me.....she won't tolerate on her blog anything stupid even if worked on diligently.
All I asked was that she told her posters to show respect to someone deserving of it imo. She accuses me of wanting to shove the sub theory down her throat. If she posted my message it would be clear that was not the case.
Enough of that, I dont think I will bother reading there any more. If you are criticised for simply wanting respect shown to people with a different opinon, it is not somewhere I wish to be.
A pity because I have found a lot of food for thought there. No more posts re Textusa as I will not be reading there any longer.