Re: Blacksmith : February 9th A WORTHLESS WEAPON

by Humanist 11.02.13 7:17

I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

by T4two 11.02.13 7:48

Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

Quote Blacksmith:

snip - almost everything I've said about
the Havern/Bennett swamp: ignorance; unwillingness or inability to look
for the facts; instinctive aggression as a response; disloyalty to
their own forum posters and comical, indeed absurd, stupidity.

Well, let's all turn the other cheek then? Attacks of this nature made on this forum are not tolerated and rightly so - making them from a blog is OK?

by bobbin 11.02.13 9:29

T4two wrote:
Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

Quote Blacksmith:
snip - almost everything I've said about
the Havern/Bennett swamp: ignorance; unwillingness or inability to look
for the facts; instinctive aggression as a response; disloyalty to
their own forum posters and comical, indeed absurd, stupidity.

Well, let's all turn the other cheek then? Attacks of this nature made on this forum are not tolerated and rightly so - making them from a blog is OK?

First red highlight - Warning Tony of what?
Good morning Humanist.
You say Tony would take the flak anyway, without our goading, and you pre-suppose that what Tony has done needed a warning as if he couldn't work the consequences out himself.
He has pursued his mission from the start with the aim of bringing the plight of Madeleine to the light.
This is now happening and is thus one success in the road of many to come, because such is the corporate determination of people on this forum, many others, and in the public at large, once they become informed.
Overall, there is an arrogance in BS writing that pre-supposes that other people cannot rationalise, analyse, weigh the pros and cons of any action, thought or deed, that they somehow need a guardian whose advice must be taken otherwise there will be a tantrum and angry attack against the people who do not accept or wish to accept such advice, since having given it their valid consideration they do not accept it as being valid advice.
Yes, everyone on this forum is free to express their opinion, to be heard, to be considered but as our first principal here, of freedom of thought, expression etc. we are not here to be bullied by one person with his/her own agenda, to acquiesce to their will and follow their commands.
We are individuals here, determined to stay the road until justice is given to a little girl who was abandoned by her parents and who then had the cowardice to pretend that they were looking for her.
Unwillingness or inability to look for the facts
This hardly merits the breath to reply, however, let it just be known that I along with many others look for facts. They are obscured, with-held, and thus not immediately apparent. However, they are betrayed by the presence of contradicting pieces of information which become upturned the more that we lift the stones that the parents claim they want to be lifted.
There can be no complaint from the parents when we concur with their call to leave no stone unturned.
We are willing to look for the facts, our inability is only measured by the level of concealment of the facts, but we are working on that.

by olipet 11.02.13 9:45

Yes, I agree with Humanist:

Freedom of Speech - and at times posters here have jumped in with such emotive response that the original poster shys away.

Obviously, debate is healthy and can often muster up new concepts or conclusions that could not have otherwise been reached.

BB is erudite and has an enjoyable command of language.

Yes, BB has recently been scathing about this forum but a few people here have said that recent emotive and sometimes aggressive reponses by posters should be excused by the recent hearing.

Thus, perhaps we could excuse BB?

by Guest 11.02.13 10:47

Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

Blacksmith : February 9th A WORTHLESS WEAPON - Page 3 410353720

by Kepharel 11.02.13 11:32

I think I have maybe one or two posts on here since I joined, but I am persuaded by this thread to make another. I read most copy of BB regarding the McCanns. As a quick aside before I make my point, the real subject of all these forums, Madeleine McCann, has been largely forgotten IMO over the years of the Forum and Blog 'Trench Warfare' BB describes. Who remembers Archduke Franz Ferdinand as being the cause of WW1...if you get my point. Anyhow I have always been impressed with the logic and analytical skills of BB and Dr Martin Roberts. What they say is an articulation of what many 'feel': those without the time in life's busy schedule to evaluate every twist and turn as the drama unfolds, but who nevertheless are unable to let the injustice perpetrated on this particular young girl go.

The trouble with this post (in the BB I assume) is his inability to recognise that to follow events a person is predisposed to find a 'home' of like minded individuals; it's human nature after all. Additionally he appears to make a presumption that by choosing you become some intellectual Philistine who can only take up arms against any other points of view. Personally I keep up to date with both sides of the argument, regardless of any beliefs or preconceptions that I hold, but my natural 'home' is here. One day MM may well turn up out of the blue, alive or dead, and the 'war' BB promotes in his article will have been won or lost. The real lesson, I suspect, is that her fate and any justice for her will be, as BB suggests, forgotten or ignored amid the carnage of victory and defeat in what he only sees in terms of the simplistic internet attrition the years have visited on Team McCann's guilt or innocence.

by olipet 11.02.13 11:39

Well... - that was put simply and perfectly and articulated my thoughts exactly.
thumbsup

by ShuBob 11.02.13 11:56

The McCanns have long forgotten about Maddie IMO. Today, Gerry is meant to be giving a speech about Leveson and having to relieve their "darkest days" during the inquiry. What has that got to do with Maddie? What about the dark days she was subjected to by both him and his wife if one is to believe their theory?

by plebgate 11.02.13 17:01

They did not call for restrictions when they asked the press to announce that Maddie had been abducted. It was only when uncomfortable questions started being asked that they suddenly wanted restrictions placed on the press.

by Cristobell 11.02.13 22:39

Didn't we establish a short while ago that Blacksmith's Bureau had more than one contributor?

by Mirage 11.02.13 23:04

[quote="Cristobell"]Didn't we establish a short while ago that Blacksmith's Bureau had more than one contributor?[/quote
That would explain a lot. I had thought we were looking at a bad case of schizophrenia.

by winjoy 12.02.13 0:29

Portia wrote:
Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

Blacksmith : February 9th A WORTHLESS WEAPON - Page 3 677999948

The party line has to be towed here or else the poster will be banned. Hardly democratic!

by aiyoyo 12.02.13 9:03

Cristobell wrote:Didn't we establish a short while ago that Blacksmith's Bureau had more than one contributor?

For what? For gathering intelligence or for writing up the articles?

My impression is there is a team of them gathering intelligence but articles are penned solely by BS.

by Guest 12.02.13 10:29

winjoy wrote:
Portia wrote:
Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

parapono
The party line has to be towed here or else the poster will be banned. Hardly democratic!

by **tigger** 12.02.13 12:17

As I understand it, Blacksmith's posts here are no longer available to be read. I am talking about the period when he said he was a member.

As these are the ones that got him banned, I feel that judging the site on that basis is somewhat controversial.

Blacksmith's articles or blog aren't banned from this site as far as I know.

I wonder if anyone on this topic actually knows the exact reasons why some members are banned. Until I do, I reserve judgement.

by Guest 12.02.13 12:28

Yes I agree, Tigger. It's unusual for accounts to be deleted along with all the posts made and I don't think that decision would have been taken lightly.

There certainly is no restriction on Blacksmith's current blogs being posted here or this topic wouldn't exist!

I don't think it's fair to say that people get banned for not agreeing with Tony. Of course not everybody does but there is no point in going on and on about it, disrupting topics and refusing to move on.

Thank you mods and administrators for the work you do in keeping the site running smoothly.

Blacksmith : February 9th A WORTHLESS WEAPON - Page 3 725573

Blacksmith : February 9th A WORTHLESS WEAPON - Page 3 725573

by Guest 12.02.13 12:46

Thanks Jean. Members here should know that people are always given a fair chance here to air their views. There are many threads here that show examples of this. The only reason people are banned is

1. Disruption

2. Abusive posts

3. Attacking posters not the posts.

Sometimes, we are quite well aware that new members are actually people who have been banned already.

As to why some posts and members are missing, that is because many, many threads were deleted from the forum in order to free up space, and tidy the forum up, otherwise there would be far too many . The Joanna Yeates being one of them as an example. If a poster only posted on that thread, then all their posts would be gone forever.

by Bob Southgate 12.02.13 12:48

winjoy wrote:
Portia wrote:
Humanist wrote:I rate Textusa as the best blogger on the subject.
And I rate Blacksmith second.

I agree with Russian Doll - instead of getting into a knee jerk reaction - pay closer attention to his words.
At the end of the day Tony Bennet would have taken the flak on himself.
Whilst we were goading him into battle, some kinder souls were warning him.

Banning is such a silly option.
We are demanding freedom of speech and then banning someone for saying what we don't like.

The party line has to be towed here or else the poster will be banned. Hardly democratic!

If you check you will find that the reason people are banned not because they don't tow the party line but because they have been rude and abusive to other members, or have disrupted threads and taken them off topic.

by Spaniel 12.02.13 13:10

I know for a fact that those with a minority opinion are allowed to post here. There was one such person here for at least a year with a high post count.

The problem was constant disruption of threads with no counter argument whatsover. There's no point in keep repeating the mantra that Madeleine was abducted and the parents blameless, although they all hasten to add the parents were neglectful of course, as no neglect, no abduction.

There have been some great threads here, the phone thread, the driving licence, creche records, last photo and many more.
All done with deep research by many, yet those of an opposing view, never seem to do their own research in an attempt to dispute the findings. I wonder Why?

by Woofer 12.02.13 14:06

The review of the book The Scorpion`s Tail by Anthony Sharples :-

"A London drug odyssey which reads like a fable ghostwritten by some zealot from the National Council on Drug Abuse. Back in 1963 Antony Sharpies took a toke of pot at a party: from there it was downhill all the way. It all happened faster than you can say ""gimme a fix."" From pot to preludin to coke to hash to skag; just like those scare movies they show to high school students. Heroin corroded his moral fiber; ""junk had subverted my will."" This being London rather than New York, Sharpies' harrowing junk-ridden existence didn't include burglaries and theft to get the cash he needed to score. He simply went to a doctor, ""registered"" and got a prescription. Even the cops didn't hassle him. Eventually though, Sharples wearied of the doper's life; he tried to kick it. But heroin had become his raison d'etre and without it he felt ""bereft."" Eventually he fastened on ""European mysticism"" as the route back. No gurus, astrology or Tarot--he meditated and worked out his own patchwork system. After a time he was able to rid himself of his habit. Somehow he never makes you care very much. Maybe because Sharples never says anything about who he was or where he was going or whom he loved before he joined the dismal ranks of West End junkies. We learn that he had a family and various girl friends, but they're no more than ciphers in this narcissistic ""destruction trip."" Maybe it's his British reticence but the whole dreary story sounds too pat, like a well-rehearsed cautionary tale. There's no visceral impact at all."

Not saying its the same person, but if it is, it would explain a lot.

by Lostfridge 12.02.13 14:52

Woofer wrote:The review of the book The Scorpion`s Tail by Anthony Sharples :-

"A London drug odyssey which reads like a fable ghostwritten by some zealot from the National Council on Drug Abuse. Back in 1963 Antony Sharpies took a toke of pot at a party: from there it was downhill all the way. It all happened faster than you can say ""gimme a fix."" From pot to preludin to coke to hash to skag; just like those scare movies they show to high school students. Heroin corroded his moral fiber; ""junk had subverted my will."" This being London rather than New York, Sharpies' harrowing junk-ridden existence didn't include burglaries and theft to get the cash he needed to score. He simply went to a doctor, ""registered"" and got a prescription. Even the cops didn't hassle him. Eventually though, Sharples wearied of the doper's life; he tried to kick it. But heroin had become his raison d'etre and without it he felt ""bereft."" Eventually he fastened on ""European mysticism"" as the route back. No gurus, astrology or Tarot--he meditated and worked out his own patchwork system. After a time he was able to rid himself of his habit. Somehow he never makes you care very much. Maybe because Sharples never says anything about who he was or where he was going or whom he loved before he joined the dismal ranks of West End junkies. We learn that he had a family and various girl friends, but they're no more than ciphers in this narcissistic ""destruction trip."" Maybe it's his British reticence but the whole dreary story sounds too pat, like a well-rehearsed cautionary tale. There's no visceral impact at all."

Not saying its the same person, but if it is, it would explain a lot.

But you post this to imply he might be a drug addict, I don't get it. Why post this unless you are 100% its Blacksmith?

by Woofer 12.02.13 17:09

You could say its merely an experiment awaiting results. That`s why I clarified that it wasn`t necessarily him.

by Olive_Boyle 12.02.13 17:44

Is it Blacksmith's turn to be hunted down and ripped to shreds? So what if that is him.

By doing this you are just proving everything he said about this forum in his blog.

Not content with tearing apart everyone connected to the McCann's side it time to turn on someone from your own side.

Please don't do it, it does the cause no good.

by **tigger** 12.02.13 18:23

'Maybe it's his British reticence but the whole dreary story sounds too pat, like a well-rehearsed cautionary tale. There's no visceral impact at all.'

Published in 1975, I think the writer is too old to be Blacksmith, that and the above quote make it very unlikely that it's 'our' Blacksmith. You could never call his style boring.
I agree with the above poster, we're not looking for 'dirt' on Blacksmith. We criticise his work, that's only fair I think.

by Guest 12.02.13 18:33

Olive_Boyle wrote:Is it Blacksmith's turn to be hunted down and ripped to shreds? So what if that is him.

By doing this you are just proving everything he said about this forum in his blog.

Not content with tearing apart everyone connected to the McCann's side it time to turn on someone from your own side.

Please don't do it, it does the cause no good.

by Bob Southgate 12.02.13 18:43

Olive_Boyle wrote:Is it Blacksmith's turn to be hunted down and ripped to shreds? So what if that is him.

By doing this you are just proving everything he said about this forum in his blog.

Not content with tearing apart everyone connected to the McCann's side it time to turn on someone from your own side.

Please don't do it, it does the cause no good.

You might want to take a step back and reconsider what comes across as a hysterical and ill thought out comment. It does you no favours whatsoever.

by Spaniel 12.02.13 18:52

Woofer wrote:You could say its merely an experiment awaiting results. That`s why I clarified that it wasn`t necessarily him.

Dont worry Woofer, far worse if you knew it was him. Could be anyone.

by Spaniel 12.02.13 18:56

Lostfridge wrote:
Woofer wrote:The review of the book The Scorpion`s Tail by Anthony Sharples :-

"A London drug odyssey which reads like a fable ghostwritten by some zealot from the National Council on Drug Abuse. Back in 1963 Antony Sharpies took a toke of pot at a party: from there it was downhill all the way. It all happened faster than you can say ""gimme a fix."" From pot to preludin to coke to hash to skag; just like those scare movies they show to high school students. Heroin corroded his moral fiber; ""junk had subverted my will."" This being London rather than New York, Sharpies' harrowing junk-ridden existence didn't include burglaries and theft to get the cash he needed to score. He simply went to a doctor, ""registered"" and got a prescription. Even the cops didn't hassle him. Eventually though, Sharples wearied of the doper's life; he tried to kick it. But heroin had become his raison d'etre and without it he felt ""bereft."" Eventually he fastened on ""European mysticism"" as the route back. No gurus, astrology or Tarot--he meditated and worked out his own patchwork system. After a time he was able to rid himself of his habit. Somehow he never makes you care very much. Maybe because Sharples never says anything about who he was or where he was going or whom he loved before he joined the dismal ranks of West End junkies. We learn that he had a family and various girl friends, but they're no more than ciphers in this narcissistic ""destruction trip."" Maybe it's his British reticence but the whole dreary story sounds too pat, like a well-rehearsed cautionary tale. There's no visceral impact at all."

Not saying its the same person, but if it is, it would explain a lot.

But you post this to imply he might be a drug addict, I don't get it. Why post this unless you are 100% its Blacksmith?

Could be anyone calling themselves Anthony Sharples. Why the knickers in a twist?

by Spaniel 12.02.13 19:18

If you want Blacksmith's, .......... I was about to translate his diatribe into 4 short paragraphs, but why give him the mirror? That's what blogging BS style is, vanity. Look at me, please look at me, I'll say anything so you'll discuss me.
.Ignore, and they have no audience. They'll dry up and die. Fade away, vain creatures.
Have no time for the cowards. Come on to a forum and debate. Very safe to sit there and pontificate without debate. I wouldn't give it the time of day. Please move on everyone, BS has passed by.

by hippywippywoo 13.02.13 8:30

It fudges the membership numbers though by not deleting the account details of people who are banned.

If they are banned and want their details removed, how do they go about requesting it as they can't post here to ask.

Tony has mentioned several times the membership number of this forum is ........ when really it isn't, it is probably far less than the number he quotes at the time.

Latest topics