The Madeleine Foundation bows to McCanns and Carter-Ruck - click here (Nov 18 2009)
Last September I posted an item about Tony Bennett - not to be confused with the crooner - who'd attached himself to Terry Lubbock's campaign over the death of his son Stuart Lubbock against the entertainer Michael Barrymore, before he was detached. Bennett was suspected of a homophobic mindset given his odd interest in deaths which may have arisen from homosexual activity.
Now I see that back in January Bennett, described as a retired solicitor, turned his interest to Madeleine McCann and set up something called The Madeleine Foundation. It is campaigning for the prosecution of the McCanns "for abandoning their children six nights in a row [in Portugal]" and aiming to "encourage" the McCanns and their friends "to tell the truth" about Madeleine's disappearance. Last year, Bennett tried unsuccessfully to launch a private prosecution against the McCanns, only to be told by magistrates in Leicester that they had no jurisdiction over the case, because Madeleine disappeared in Portugal.
The "Foundation" (or Bennett, more to the point) adds: "The case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has many parallels with other cases where families have cried 'abduction' when their infant child has gone missing - only for us all to find out later that the child has died at the hands of the parents, whether accidentally, negligently or intentionally." It/he concludes: "There is precious little evidence of an abduction."
If that is not a highly defamatory statement I don't know what is. His reason for saying this is not based on any incriminating evidence against the McCanns. He simply has developed a prejudice: if a child goes missing then the parents must be to blame.
This "Foundation" asks members to pay £10 a year and is described by Bennett as an "unincorporated association". It certainly is not a "fund" - as the Telegraph thinks - since it would have to be registered as a company (and it is not). Nor is it a charity.
Bennett is approaching his latest obsession in much the same way as he did Barrymore. No new evidence is adduced - he just demands an inquest, based on dreamt-up questions, and imputes baseless criminal activity to his targets in his media interviews and pronouncements. Why Bennett feels impelled to persecute individuals who have already suffered a tragedy is quite beyond my understanding.
Just as baffling are the morons, bigots and loafers who are signing up to Bennett's bullying members' club.
Finding Madeleine
88 comments:
Bennett qualified as solicitor in 1995 he continued to practice until 1999. Not very much experience as a practising solicitor then.
Anthony Bennett & his 'Madeleine Foundation are indeed a public nuisance. The Law Society should have a look at this man's activties. Members of this organisation should be very aware how much it could cost them joining & the association with Mr Bennett.
Tony is a retired solicitor so the Law Society won't do much.
£10 for a years' membership is certainly worth it if something can be done about the McScums, don't you think?
All hands on deck, really, in the search for Justice for Madeleine.
Not so sure the Law Society will not do much with Mr Bennett he is getting the rep as a bit of a nuisance.
Bennett sat behind Gerry Mccann at the recent HoC Select Committee on the Press.
He claimed openly on a public website that he did it in an attempt to intimidate him.
He's a stalker.
Bennett chap is a threat to vunerable family's who have lost loved ones, he needs to get a life.
I'm happy to put up comments on Bennett but let's try to avoid obvious defamation and stick to provable facts. OK?
His latest antics, distributing leaflets against the McCanns, is despicable. I am astonished that the hopeless police don't do something about it.
Hello - just found your blog on Google. Sorry I can't find the home page so am posting here (nothing to do with the solicitor story)
What is your view on what happened to Maddie McCann? I ask because at the top of the page it says you are a clairvoyant, I am interested. Many thanks.
I haven't the faintest idea what happened to poor Maddie. Her parents are to be pitied and supported, not maligned by the imbecilic lynch mob. The site address is www.madamearcati.blogspot.com.
Judging by a few idiotic comments that I won't be publishing, there appears to be a class isssue with the McCanns in the minds of certain trogs. One moron tries to make an issue of the McCanns not being "charged" because they're doctors. It would be best if the McCanns took legal action against these scum as well as the demented Madeleine Foundation.
Tony Bennett has received a 'discreation' from the SRA over his song for Christmas 'Silent Night' concerning the McCann's, this may effect Mr Bennett's chances of re-applying for his solicitors practising certificate.
It should be noted that Mr Bennett does not hold a current solicitors practising certificate.
Bennett is an interesting character, but the McCanns are common vulgarity
embodied, and they make my skin crawl. Simply trotting off to University doesn't give one 'Class' these days, you know (oh sorry, obviously you don't...).
Bennett is certainly interesting in the clinical sense, I do hope he leaves his brain to science. There's much to learn about his form of behaviour.
As to the McCanns you appear to be suffering from a class and education complex. Read Proust. That'll get you over this silly problem of yours. Expand your soul. xx
I am delighted that the McCanns are now taking legal action against the Madeleine Foundation for defamation. I hope they also begin suits against the trogs who have nothing better to do than torment others.
Certain commenters from the Madeleine Foundation are hoping I'll put up their questions about the Madeleine case.
As I have said already, asking questions is not proof of anything. Any fool can dream-up questions, usually based on a misunderstanding of the evidence we know of. Bennett's methodology of persecution is to dream-up questions. In a court of law, evidence is required to support a claim.
The Foundation's basic argument is based on a prejudice, as I explain in my piece. Bennett has no new evidence, nothing to offer but his own bile. And his website will be closed down shortly.
Interesting. Actually the Madeleine Foundation simply listed out things we all know to be true, and checked with the McCanns and their TEAM OF LAWYERS (errr...why do parents need a team of lawyers!) to make sure nothing they said was incorrect.
The truth is, the McCanns lost their child, they are culpable for that, regardless of whether she was abducted by someone who wanted a child with a colomba.
No dount this will never appear on this site...but I had to have my say (its called free expression!).
Er, the McCanns need a team of lawyers to handle mischief-makers like yourself who in previous lives knitted at the guillotine.
All the Madeleine Foundation has done is to ask a series of dreamt-up questions to a number of matters which have no legal momentum. This failure to accept reality goes to the heart of Tony Bennett's problem who to date has pursued lost causes based on fantasies and a need to persecute. I pity his 89 year old mother - surely she can knock some sense into this fool. I hope they have a great holiday in Croatia.
When you say the McCann's are "culpable" I assume you speak as someone who's never made any mistakes and escaped the full consequences of those mistakes because you were lucky - like most people. Who are you? And how's your glass house?
A bigoted moron has written to me that "at least" Tony Bennett has tried to find out what happened to Madeleine. No he hasn't. He has not unearthed one new piece of useful evidence, but he has reached his own conclusions against the McCanns based on his own hostility to legal process and to the rules of evidence. The McCanns on the other hand have done everything humanly possible to find their daughter while Bennett loafs about fizzling out his vitriol.
You have a fine sense of humour Madame Arcati
"The McCanns on the other hand have done everything humanly possible to find their daughter...."
Fair near split my sides! Keep it up, not had such a good laugh in ages.
I am not one for pointing the finger but I am someone who has gone through an extremely traumatic experience leading to the loss of my home, job and friends after wrongfully being accused of causing a bruise on my daughters leg. 6 months of hell with social services and then an apology after they then changed their and decided all was okay !!!
I am sorry if u disagree but the mcanns actions ended in the poor girl going missing and have evaded all forms of questioning that should be apparent... why am I different to them? because I am not a doctor??
This situation is giving out a message to those who DO wish to harm children that there are ways of doing it and getting away with it and how long will it be before those accused will start using this case as an example behind their claims of either racism or discrimination??? I mean, you are only treating me this way because I am not a doctor.....
What they did was wrong and nobody can say it was not and if you wish to dispute what I say then ring social services and ask them whether you are legally allowed to leave your children alone at home while you go to a friends down the road for food and wine.....
May I suggest you realise that your own support of Maddies parents is solely due to your own opinions as unless you know more than anyone else, as your actions may suggest, how can it be more?
Tony Bennetts views may not be the same views as everyones but remember that neither are yours, you are purely the heads and tails of a coin, one of you is right and the other is wrong and neither can say they know the truth.
My own experiences prove that the Mccanns are not being treat normally than would and should be expected and this you cannot argue as I have been there. I see people on this site condemning Tony and personally I feel this is wrong as I feel the same, I feel questions are still needing to be answered and the fact my own daughter bares such striking resemblance to Maddy at her age cuts to the bone.
I respect every argument but the fact there IS an argument means questions need answering.
If I were to lose my daughter in any circumstance that I had a bearing on, however minimal, I doubt I would be able to live with myself let alone function to the degree both of these people are..I just feel so confused over many aspects. I am not bigotted either, I am merely a parent myself who feels so sad for a girl I never even knew and until I am satisfied the Mccans have been through what I went through so absolutely no doubt is left then I will stand by Tony. The facts may not be new but facts are facts and they are stacked highly against a couple who 'seem' highly protected...
... I hope you are right and she is safe and well and I would do anything I could to know BUT none of us do know NOT EVEN U so all opinions should have the right to be maintained and not silenced... maybe I should list you a few similar instances where opinions have been argued and left to run... many a lot higher in profile than this case and maybe you can explain why the people involved in these were not given the same support as two mere doctors.
I leave u with this thought, upon looking at the 'family' photo you see Jerry and Kate, both with a twin in their arms and Madddy sitting alone as if left outside...maybe I am just being stupid, maybe I am wrong but please have a look at any family picture you can and
look at what you see....
Reading these letters (and unpublished others which are defamatory in my view) it's increasingly apparent to me that the McCanns have become a focal point for a number of malcontents and others with some personal axe to grind. It's as if these people want the McCanns punished for what has happened in other cases.
No one, including the McCanns, knows what has happened to Madeleine. That is the particular tragedy - for the girl and her parents and siblings. I am sorry that bitter and twisted people cannot see beyond their grievances. I am sorry that this wasted energy has been exploited by persecutors.
As a PS I would add something else. You do not have a right to impugn the good name of people without risking the consequences of breaking the law.
you seem to be taking my point the wrong way, I again insist that as you are not privvy to the 'facts' and only the same information everyone else has, unless you feel the need to enlighten us, your comments are based solely on your own opinion and that alone... I repeat, NOT because of your knowledge of facts, just because of the way you interpret the information available.
EVERYONE is entitled to opinions until actual facts are available and in this case sadly there are no facts available except facts given by people known to be biased.
I am not pointing actual blame but merely placing an opinion on a situation based on available information, alongside my own personal experiences and you for one cannot EVER comment on my own personal experience to me personally.
You also mention factors such as the law itself, I retort and state to you, practise what you preach. You are calling people liars and bigotts based on your own opinion and NOT based on fact, again unless you would like to enlighten us.
I apologize if my caring for a little girl who I feel has a case surrounding her which has not been fully investigated but you try having a daughter that resembles her to such an extent that it saddens you to look at her while thinking of the possibilities surrounding Maddy.
Threaten me, accuse me...say what you will, I say only the truth and I dare you to post this message live on your site and see if it is challenged.
I am merely expressing the facts that had this have been myself in this situation I WOULD have been dealt with differently and that is FACT... not the foundation you build your own libeliss remarks upon.
Comment about me in a mannor I see personal once again and I shall personally sue you for libel. That is not an threat, it is a promise.
Since you are anonymous it would be very difficult to libel you.
The Madeleine case has attracted too much opinion.
We can certainly agree that you know no more about the disappearance of the girl than I do.
And while I'm here I suggest you all read this
http://news.aol.co.uk/madeleine-book-may-spark-1m-payout/article/20090923055444126903956
The 'Madeleine Foundation' website has know been closed down.
i notice my last comments were not posted up. i wonder why that was. as for the madeleine foundation website being shut down, i really hope u r happy that a site merely having factual information within it has been taken away from curious ppl, curious ppl with a right to know.
i notice u have no explanation as to why my own experience occured... am i not equal to the mccanns ??
i am going to the press, with that question if you cannot answer it !!
I have no idea who you are. I thought we were talking about the McCanns. I'm not interested in your case. How dare you try to draw attention to yourself by attacking the McCanns. You should be ashamed of yourself.
As for your unpublished comments, I am not posting rambling libels and threats. Either adopt a temperate style and get a grip or join a meditation class.
You know very well my posts you did not show were not threatening and having been taken to hell and back by Social Services wrongfully I think I am entitled to know why the mccanns have not even been approached.
I once again say, unless you know what has happened then your own standing is the same as mine, merely an opinion based on known facts. What gives you the right to tell me what I can and cannot think ??
Are you so important as to believe that your thoughts are the only valid ones.
I am not trying to draw attention to myself at all, merely wondering why it seems as if it is one rule for some and another for others and using references of my own experiences to prove my point.. see, my points are actually based on a fact. "why was i put though so mush hell over a mark on my daughters leg and the mccanns have, best case scenario, indirectly acting in a way that lead to their daughters kidnap and
not only have they not been trounced by Social Services BUT anyone who dares to even think that some questions need addressing are threatened, sued, called all sorts etc...
That in itself mystifies me.
As for telling me to chill out etc etc... try being in a position where you cannot make sense of this situation and every road leads back to a question which has been avoided. How many children go missing, how many are NOT investigated fully?? how many children go missing and not only are there no investigations by Social Services BUT "foundations" and "funds" are set up.
You seem to be trying to say I am wrong and accusations are being made against me BUT on what basis are you saying I am such a bad person and the things I am saying are libelous?
For me to be making a libel comment it would mean I am saying something to deliberately harm the reputation of the person, people in question... this is not the case though is it, I am asking for very specific questions to be answered and you cannot... Even when the entire foundation of your argument is nothing more than your own opinion... so are mine so we are equal.
I note that you proclaim yourself "the premier media and showbiz clairvoyant", yet do not seem able to offer any insight into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Heigh-ho, onto my main point.
A few days ago I sent the Find Madeleine Fund the following email:
"As a parent of two daughters and grandparent to four grandchildren, I have always taken a close and sympathetic interest in the tragic case of missing Madeleine. However, I have some worrying questions which you may be kind enough to answer.
1. David Hughes and Clarence Mitchell – both working for Find Madeleine Fund in a public relations capacity – have said in well-documented videos that the Fund would NOT be used to pay legal fees. David Hughes says “they are not seeking support from the fund for legal costs…” As stated in this video on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqnHDPeR6-c
Clarence Mitchell said to a New Zealand radio station, “anybody who has given money to help find Madeleine need have no fear that their money is being spent on lawyers fees or anything like that.” As stated in the audio file here: http://mccannfundfraud.info/2009/04/clarence-mitchell-lies-on-nz-radio/
Considering that there was a sizable six-figure sum of money apparently allocated to legal fees in the first set of accounts published by the Find Madeleine Fund, those statements from Mr Hughes and Mr Mitchell could give the appearance of possibly being untrue and may inadvertently mislead donors (or prospective donors, such as myself).
The current legal action against the website, "The Madeleine Foundation", by Carter Ruck (possibly the most expensive libel lawyers in the UK) I assume is being funded by Mr & Mrs McCann themselves. If that is not the case, would you pleased be so kind to advise me who is funding the possible action, because I certainly would not wish to donate to your Fund merely to benefit lawyers, nor to assist in any action that smacks of interferring in freedom of speech. I am only interested in donating to help in the quest to find Madeleine.
2. I also understand that it has been stated that the FindMadeleine offical website was being created by volunteers. Yet the accounts apparently show an expenditure of over £37,000 for the website which, apart from appearing excessive to say the least, seems to be contrary to what was originally stated."
So far no response of any kind received from the Find Madeleine Fund!
I see my post has not been shown,
are you a friend of the McCanns i wonder madame arcati?
you cannot read the evidence in this case and still see the McCanns as innocent, I know a friend who can get information just from holding a persons belongings, he has written to the McCanns about this and they have never replied, he also stated in the letter that he was real and wanted no payment at all, they have never replied to him, is this for the same reason they refused a lie detector test? GUILT
Dear Shaun, I do not know your case. We're talking about the McCanns here. You plainly feel aggrieved, you say your case is comparable with theirs. You give the impression that they should suffer some penalty because you suffered some penalty, or something. All I know is that each case has its own unique set of factors. Beyond that I cannot comment.
I have no idea who is funding the Carter Ruck legal action. Given the obscene amount of abuse the McCanns have suffered, they are entitled to take action to defend themselves and remind the public that there is no evidence that Maddie is dead, and that the investigation must not be side-tracked by cranks and sofa detectives.
Why should the McCanns respond to your friend? Perhaps your friend is a loon. Perhaps not. What do you expect them to say? I do not know the McCanns personally but I am sympathetic to their situation. I feel for any parent who has lost a child.
As Voltaire said
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"
This applies equally to both sides of this argument. People have the right to their own opinion and views and should be allowed to freely express them.
Madame Arcati wrote "As a PS I would add something else. You do not have a right to impugn the good name of people without risking the consequences of breaking the law."
Oh, so the Mccanns haven't impugned the good names of countless people by pointing the finger at numerous innocent people and splashing their names and photos over the headlines with absolutely no evidence whatsoever? I await your usual mature response, which will either contain the standard childish insult (which always gives us a good laugh)or you will just post your response but not let anyone see the post you are responding to. Very brave.
As to the Voltaire quoter - that assumes both sides are reasonable and civilised. The MF-ers are just a rabble of malcontents with various personal issues; or sofa detectives who should be playing poker or chess instead while the latest Miss Marple plays out on the TV. Why wouuld the McCanns not drag you to court for your vicious and unfounded slurs? What happened in your childhood that relieved you of any responsibility?
Who are these countless people the McCanns have attacked? Another piece of fiction dreamt up by St Tony? If you imagine you can make unfounded allegations and not provoke a response, you're even more stupid than I imagine. Expecting the couple to stand about like passive bison while you filthy fantasists with your inferiority complexes have a go? Like to victimise do you? Memories of playground politics?
I hope that lived up to your expectation, dearie.
Much obliged, Dearie xx
It was mental illness in my childhood that relieved me of any responsibility. And it's mental illness in my adulthood that convinces me that the McCanns are innocent.
A loon with a sense of humour. I predict a full recovery.
I'm feeling better already - with all this laughter I might be able to give up the tablets by the weekend.
Madame Arctati - You are truly better than valium!
yet again you have a go at people for merely having an opinion while youself pushing your own opinions across and obviously having a superiority complex.
you do not know the facts so again I ask for you to explain as to why nobody elses opinions are important. May I say that i do not know you so can only cast an opinion, which will no doubt either be hidden from view or I shall recieve some form of response saying I am something defamatory, you seem quite arrogant and due to, once again, your opinions being nothing more than the flip side of a coin what gives you this right ???
Yes, I am quite arrogant. Get used to it. At least you know where you stand with me.
Are you familiar with the laws on defamation? Did you realise that if you allege that certain persons are criminally responsible for something, when in fact the police have decided there's no case to pursue, that you may end up being sued for libel - or at least end up with your website being closed down?
You talk about a right to have an opinion. That you certainly do. Privately you can think and say what you please. But why would you imagine you can try to destroy people's lives by publicly exercising your "rights" to say whatever occurs to you at the expense of others? What about the right to a good name? Are you so immersed in your own troubles that you couldn't give a fuck about anyone else?
We all have opionions. I base mine in this instance on expert forensic opinion - not idle speculations by persons with other agendas.
I have no idea if your particular case is a match for the McCanns'. But I don't see why you think others should suffer because of possible injustices in your own case. Why not focus on the injustice in your own case to better understand the nightmare the McCanns find themselves in.
Madame Arcati, do you think it acceptable for the newspapers to print photos and articles about innocent people i.e. the parents of the fair-haired moroccan child, the mysterious yacht-woman,etc etc as possible abductors? Would you be happy if it was you? These were major newspaper headlines, not "pieces of fiction dreamnt up by St Tony". Apart from making false accusations and hurting innocent people, these reports only served to show up the farce these sightings have become.
"Are you so immersed in your own troubles that you couldn't give a fuck about anyone else?"
Have you had a reply from the mccanns re this question, Madame Arcati?
I know it's your blog but can we please try an keep the language clean - Children might be watching.
Dare I opine that expert forensic opinion/evidence in this case actually indicates that someone died in the McCann's holiday apartment? With no one previously reported as having died in said apartment and only one child missing it does, you must admit, look a little suspicious.
Of course, and I do honestly believe it a possibility, the McCanns could just be particularly unlucky in having had their daughter abducted from an apartment in which a previously unknown/unreported death took place!
There has been a succession of suspects and sightings connected to the presumed abduction: all have led nowhere to date. Sometimes it's necessary to publicise photofits etc in the hope of jogging someone's memory. In trying to find the girl there is inevitable collateral activity which involves the media. It can be unfortunate but it can also bring results, as other cases have shown. Who can blame the McCanns for pursuing any plausible or credible lead? Wouldn't you?
So you think losing your child would not preoccupy your thoughts? I don't hear the McCanns hitting out at others who have suffered as they have.
I do apologise for my language slip - you'll find worse on this site. Best you don't stray too far.
Re the dogs and what was reported - nothing was found that could be pursued legally. There was no supporting evidence. If you know better as a forensics expert then I suggest you contact the police and pursue it with them. Or confine the amateur detective work to an appreciation of Poirot.
Re THE ABDUCTION and what was reported - nothing was found that could be pursued legally. There was no supporting evidence. If you know better as a forensics expert then I suggest you contact the police and pursue it with them. Or confine the amateur detective work to an appreciation of Poirot or JACKANORY.
This disgusting site sounds like the work of Rosiepops, one of the nastiest and most bigoted people I have come across on the net. You can try to stifle the truth all you like, but Amaral would love to see his day in court with the parents, and then we will see who is lying!!!!
Amaral will crumble like a house of cards like all the other fantasists. Perhaps the paper from his books can be put to better use and thereby justify the felling of the trees.
Madame Arcati, please would you be so kind as to tell me what evidence there is that an abduction took place.?
Once again MA, what gives you the right to call people fantasists ??
Please, explain once again the thing that gives you this right to not see any other point of view other than your own which only has the same chance of being correctas the one you are fighting against.
Opinion does not have to be kept to yourself, that surely would not constitute to having a right to freely speak. Once again you go into the legal jargon surrounding libel etc etc and you go on to say that this is a risk because the mccanns have been fully investigated and authorities saw no further reason to question further.... ARE YOU JOKING ???
Maybe I am wrong but I think you will find that just like thousands support your side of the argument thousands support the other side, even the Vatican has withdrawn their support.
The issue I find is that your side of the argument is not as fully supported and concrete as the side that you fight against and that is fact... I am not saying the mccanns did anything as I have not got a clue.. and you samely cannot say they didnt as you also do not know... Certain aspects of this story, on both sides, cannot be ignored and I feel personally that too many have been.
All I want is to have no doubt and in my opinion alone I honestly feel that if you have nothing to hide and nothing to fear then you can provide everything to a degree that will solidify your innocence.
I reiterate, I am not, will not and do not say the mccanns harmed their child, all I am saying is many pieces of information are available for public consumption on both sides of the argument HOWEVER only one side has remained constant and only one has been constantly changed, constantly avoided questions, has run outside what I personally would call "normal" channels and has had to be funded by god knows where in order to fight being challenged.
Many parents make mistakes and I am not so stupid as to say no parents leave their children alone BUT MA, what they did was wrong, I am sorry but it was and I know that in this country people would "normally" be in DEEP water for that alone... not once have the mccanns shown or admitted an error and offered advice for others who adopt these ways of parenting... I just know I would and maybe that would be a major compaign in itself... Campaigning to make parents aware that leaving children alone is unsafe and illegal and can have dire consequences.
I too can be quite arrogant so maybe you and I are what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object....
Still waiting for a reply re evidence of an abduction
I have emailed you with some important information, please read and get in touch..thanx
Re the abduction, the child is missing and forensic experts have not found sufficient evidence to pursue an explanation other than that of abduction. In the absence of such evidence it is reasonable to suppose the girl was abducted. If you as a forensics expert know better than the FSS and others, please contact the police with your information.
So far as Pope Benedict is concerned a Sunday Mirror columnist wrote that all mention of Ratzi's meeting with the McCanns was removed from the Vatican website when the pair were made Arguido.
It's interesting that few followed up this story and that's probably because the website updates its news regularly and items fall off - if this is doubted then point out to me if there's evidence the website retains other large news items indefinitely. It should also be noted that though the Pope blessed a photo of Madeleine, during this audience the Pope made no reference to Madeleine in his special blessing to the crowd for kids everywhere.
This is most probably yet another example of a story that has been built up by Chinese whispers into something bigger than it is.
I ask again Madame Arcati, what EVIDENCE is there of an abduction. Not having sufficient evidence to support another theory is NOT evidence of an abduction.
I have answered your question. You have no evidence it was not an abduction. In the absence of evidence for alternative theories, abduction is the most plausible explanation. Many alternative ideas have been investigated and all end in nothing. That's your answer.
But I'm surprised you have to ask me when your tone tells me you know everything.
No I don't know everything, unlike you who obviously does.
Oh I think you do think you know everything as you knit at the guillotine, clucking with bigoted certainties. I know no more than you do. In the absence of certainty I give the McCanns the benefit of the doubt. Because the alternative is the vile and disgusting lynch mob mentality of the MF-ers, a mediaeval mob of persecutors and fantasists. And don't think I don't know the MF site has gone underground.
Madame Arcati wrote "And don't think I don't know the MF site has gone underground."
Oooo do you have spies? We're quaking in our boots. The MF site hasn't and doesn't need to go underground. Anyway it's been nice chatting to you Madame Arcati...you've given me and many others a great laugh, shame you didn't realise it was at your expense. Don't bother replying as I won't be looking in to read it. Bye bye, you take care now.
One last thing Madame, the MF site is back up. Not very underground is it?.You may want to amend your title.
I'm amending nothing, it'll be closed down soon enough. Perhaps the sane among you can point out to me what's been removed in the hope of heading off the McCanns' litigation.
MA is actually correct about her statement regarding the MF site. Mr Bennett is indeed involved in a more "underground" conspiracy site and I am not a McCann family hater, I myself approached the site
as the "home" page suggests it is a site dealing with missing children cases and general child orientated issues. To gain access you have to go through a process to register and your IP address is checked and verified and you are sent an email with a link to activate the full site.
It is then made apparent that the site is not what it seems, it is a site more vicious than the MF site and when I approached the site with the views of being helped in my own case I was banned. A personal friend registered in order to approach and gain an explanation and was spoken to in a disgusting mannor. She was told that they had no idea what they were expected to do and that the police are the people to speak to and in turn she was banned.
So maybe an apology is due to MA... or am I a liar too??
I will happily prove everything I have said and also facts surrounding Mr Bennett and his reluctance to contact me to answer a couple of questions after I was tricked into "subscribing" to help the Madeleine McCann to find that subscription goes directly to Mr Bennetts personal Paypal account...
Mr r - contact mr bennett and repeat what I have just read please - as what you have said is an utter lie - I will be watching to see if you repeat the same
To the person claiming me to be a liar, I am not sure what part you are referring to as a lie... The Paypal account payment part or the website that banned me and my friend for nothing. The website I can prove and anyone else who doubts the Paypal information please check yourself.. Go to the MF website, click on subscribe and it will direct you to Paypal in order to set the subscription up. At the base of the Paypal set up page it clearly states ajsbennett@serviceprovider.com
Please feel free to leave any questions regarding my claim and I will answer. I am not a liar... Paypal 'may' be set up differently from what I can see BUT I have emailed Mr Bennett 3 times now regarding this and another query and I have been ignored.
Also if you are trying to say that I am lying about the site then please justify your comments as I will happily prove what I have said. I have even forwarded the exact emails I sent to the sites admin regarding my issue... Dont tell me, myself and MA are just conspiring...
people who live in glass houses hey !!
Oh and Mr Anonymous, IF Mr Bennett is not anything to do with this other site then why on earth did the link to his temporarily closed site divert to it and why was there a thread within the site regarding questions for Mr Bennett, and how on earth, IF this is all fabrication on my part, did I know Mr Bennett was on holiday ???? I will tell you, because the bloody site you claim I lied about clearly states thats the reason the thread questions were not being answered !!!
No bugger off and chuck your accusations
at people elsewhere !!
I say again you a a liar - and I know if for a fact .
Come on then, explain the exact thing I am lying about and I will prove otherwise...
He is not a liar, not getting involved but
I know that for a fact.
Mr R...are you arguing with yourself??
Nope, it's 2 ppl with the same initial in the surname agreeing with one another... I have been emailed by Mr Bennett today after he has returned from a weeks holiday... Will explain all when he does what he has claimed he will.
How much has the Madeline Foundation raised? How much has gone to fund Mr Bennett's activities?
£90,000 and growing? Sale of 60 reasons a nice little earner!
Madeleine Foundation met yesterday 14 November 2009 Accounts top of the agenda?
I have been looking at some of the comments on Twitter and the like recently and at some of the strong comments made by anti McCann people. This includes a real obsessed character calling himself Anorakian on Twitter which I have recently picked up on via Madame Arcati’s tweets
The fact of the matter is that there is no definite proof that the McCann’s are responsible for harming their child, there is no definite proof that they are not. This needs to be proven in a court of law doesn’t it?
There is a viable accusation of abandonment and neglect maybe but there is no clear guideline to show that the distance they were from the apartment can be considered to be such. This needs to be proven in a court of law.
There is a possibility that they made a grave error of judgement and that the child was indeed abducted. There is a possibility that they made a grave error of judgement and the perception that they have something to hide is because they and their friends did not carry out any checks on any children when they were at the Tapas bar and they don’t want that in the public domain. Let’s face it; there are thousands of such theories on the net.
There are many theories by people who have collated information from ‘official’ report, ex policemen, the media etc. Many of these people have formed opinions which they swear are objective but how can they be? There is no information available to the ordinary everyday citizen that can be 100% confirmed as being a true and accurate account and that includes the book written by the ex Portuguese policeman (The Truth of the Lie)
The fact is that these theories are individuals’ personal views having analysed the information available to them, in other words SUBJECTIVE theories.
There are those who believe the McCann’s have committed the ultimate crime, there are those who believe the child was abducted due to negligence, there are those who honestly think it is OK to leave the children and there was just an unfortunate series of events. Most people believe they have a right to form an opinion and cite ‘Freedom of Speech’ to justify their accusations or support.
No one knows all the facts.
What must be considered amongst the conspiracy theories is that the McCann’s are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, conveniently forgotten in some cases.
There is a possibility that they made a grave error of judgement and have to live with it for the rest of their lives, in this scenario they do not need the conspiracy theorists, arm chair detectives etc getting involved and making matters worse.
Those that defame the McCann supporters must realise that all individuals have the right to an opinion and have the right not to be insulted or ridiculed.
Personal insults directed at the McCann’s such as ‘she is common’ ‘she is sick’ etc are irrelevant, immature and not very constructive.
The various videos on You Tube posted by people are an interesting example of conspiracy theorists looking for evidence that can be interpreted a number of ways and none provides firm evidence of innocence or guilt.
The press have decided to take a subjective view in favour of the McCann’s it is said. Of course they will, they cannot afford to do anything else as they would be under threat of legal action. They have no definitive proof that the McCann’s are guilty of anything, innocent until proven guilty.
Is the issue being handled well by the authorities?
Is the issue being handled well by the media?
Are the McCann’s victims of circumstances?
Are the McCann’s criminals?
I have my own opinions but would certainly not air them in the public domain, freedom of speech or not, it is not my right to potentially add to the grief and hurt. Freedom of speech does not give anyone the right to air their thoughts and hurt people regardless.
Victims of crime - such as the McCanns - must these days also suffer the attentions of conspiracy theorists and other time-wasters who latch onto tragedies to further ulterior preoccupations. These individuals are not interested in truth or evidence, or due process of law, but dedicated to persecution as an expression of inchoate anger.
Post a Comment