Bret's Blog Gone? Sadly, No.

I haven't read his 'books' - in fact, I had never heard of him until he decided to latch onto Madeleine McCann.
But from the reviews I've seen of them, Bret is devioid of talent, originality, accuracy, wit - everything, in fact.
And as for the abuse he spews at 'enemies' - it really is just word vomit, the kind of obscene rantings you expect from whacked-out crackheads sprawled on some dirty pavement.

I am reading one of Bret's victim's blogs:

http://affairsvalentino.blogspot.com/2011_08_01_archive.html



I had two personal emails from David Bret last night. They were extremely scary. He closed the first one with a “You don’t even want to know me now!! ” And the second one well accusing me of child cruelty, stopping a government-run petition, saying I had thousands of enemies…etc. etc. I replied in kind and was not really sure if governments run petitions. Bret continued his brisk daily hateful lies filing about me on his blog. I guess you can read it there because it really speaks for itself. It is all so over the top there is little point anymore in addressing any of the scrolls of lies he pens from his pit of fire each day.

So, now his imaginary petition was run by the Government? I think not, lying little oik.

It'll be like his imaginary friend at the Express, and the imaginary 'Indian policeman'.

bb1 wrote:I am reading one of Bret's victim's blogs:

http://affairsvalentino.blogspot.com/2011_08_01_archive.html



I had two personal emails from David Bret last night. They were extremely scary. He closed the first one with a “You don’t even want to know me now!! ” And the second one well accusing me of child cruelty, stopping a government-run petition, saying I had thousands of enemies…etc. etc. I replied in kind and was not really sure if governments run petitions. Bret continued his brisk daily hateful lies filing about me on his blog. I guess you can read it there because it really speaks for itself. It is all so over the top there is little point anymore in addressing any of the scrolls of lies he pens from his pit of fire each day.

So, now his imaginary petition was run by the Government? I think not, lying little oik.

It'll be like his imaginary friend at the Express, and the imaginary 'Indian policeman'.

Is your Government allowed to run petitions?

Why would they want to, Tony? It's more complete nonsense from Bret.
Government running a petition - totally ridiculous.

And because the Government petitions site has crashed, this conspiraloon thinks:


autonomy14 Mark
@
@RothleyPillow @qaudrille @cosyrin the HM Government website may have been Carter Rucked? I'm having the same issue. #mccann



No, fool - it's because of all the real people signing petitions calling for the public hanging, drawing and quartering of rioters.

That is a classic.

Damned Fools

Speaking of things which are gone...much weeping and wailing in hateland today because Spudder's blog thingy has apparently been removed from the Daily Telegraph's DIY blog feature..

spudgun01Mike Spudgun
I have absolutely no idea what happened to my TELEGRAPH Blogs on the #McCanns. They were there one minute, the next WHOOSHH! Clunk!!
5 hours ago

I would think the people to thank are his fellow-haters for drawing attention to the lies and libel; it had been sitting there minding its own business, no-one even knew about it, till they all started high-fiving because they had got their hate into a 'real' cyber-paper.

Why they think they have any right to force their libel onto reputable companies, I do not know.

Oh dear, what a shame. The other hateblogger, jda, has also seemingly been removed from the Telegraph site.

Here's a hint - stop libelling, and lying, about people, and this might not keep happening.

Yer, they do it every time, don't they. You would think that they'd have cotton on by now, but they are too bloody thick.

I know, look at this from MM:

I don't know why they have bothered doing that because it's all over twitter and the Internet...like bolting the barn door AFTER the horse has bolted!!


They like to think they are a step ahead off us when in fact.....their 30 steps behind us!

No, dear - because the thing is, it doesn't matter if it is 'all over' the hater sections of twitter, etc - no-one reads that except other haters, and people laughing at them.

Main thing is, it isn't on any reputable sites which normal people read.

Number of signatures:
57
Created by:
David Bret

bb1 wrote:Number of signatures:
57
Created by:
David Bret

Yep. I saw that. How many days is it now? And how many do they need?

Well, at least twenty of them will be by the Ironside hydra troll

I think Brat has rather a long way to go - I do hope he is holding his breath

But, but, The Shadow Home Secretary is waiting on him. Hanging on his every word, so to speak. At the rate this is going he won't be even a shadow by the time this gets off the ground.

Yes, I am sure the real reason Parliament was recalled was so they could all fast-track Brat's stupid petition, due to him being so impotent. Sorry, important.

I thought his petition had sunk?
Didn't he blame the Valentino woman for it?

crazytony wrote:I thought his petition had sunk?
Didn't he blame the Valentino woman for it?

Well, it has rather. At least, it's floundering.

Speaking of fish....Spudders has come out with a load of Dark Force WUM-mery, which naturally the pitchforkers are lapping up. It's one of those long twittertw@t things:

Mike Spudgun (@spudgun01)
Posted Sunday 14th August 2011 from Twitlonger


Just to elucidate the Marting Grime aspect and the Specialist dogs, Eddie & Keela. When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Just to elucidate the Marting Grime aspect and the Specialist dogs, Eddie & Keela. When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Grimes made it very clear that he was unhappy with what he referred to as his "treatment" by authorities unknown, (although he did say they were British), who had coerced him, he says, to "play down" the significance of the dogs' findings. Grimes let it be known that Eddies and Keelas 'scentings' were irrefutable, in his mind, having worked with the dogs successfully on very many cases for the many of the Constabularies in the UK on high profile cases.

Grimes stated that he was "instructed" to ensure that in his subsequently produced report, he was to emphasise that the dog's findings were inadmissable as evidence, (which is of course, true, but he had NEVER been instructed on any other case to point this out), and that they were effectively inconsequential without further corroborative evidence.

Birmingham FSS initially suggested in their reports that recovered material, as indicated in spots by the dogs, DID appear to have significant 'markers', consistent with Madeleine's profile. Of course, that initial report, (like so many initial reports in this case), was subsequently CHANGED!

But that's ANOTHER story for another day.......




'Story' is the correct word for it - as in Shaggy Dog Story.

Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Really? And this dynamite story never saw the light of day, because UK journos are all too terrified of Evil Clarrie to print it, even though it would be a career-maker?

Bollocks! If people believe that, they will believe anything. It's just more rubbish from Brat's crew.

It is about as true as Brat's story about the Express sub and the photo of the McCanns smiling; there wasn't a word of truth in that either. Maybe it is the same mystery 'sub-editor'?

Or maybe this 'sub-editor' is related to the 'Indian policeman' Brat invented?

Not to mention Brat's risible claims that his silly petition has Government backing, when it is merely on the government petitions site, along with all the demands to bring back public executions.

Still, I suppose it all helps to give them hope....

From the Ironside hydra:


Qaudrille Rocki Stone
@ @ExNOTWJourno1 http://t.co/vEnEuTi SPUDGUN is a serious journalist and I would trust him with my childs life. #mccann
1 hour ago Favorite Retweet Reply

Spudders? Serious? One film about fish does not a Pulitzer prizewinner make..

Oh, and what child, you fake? You are a bloke who pretends to be a woman with cancer, whilst running uncountable hateblogs under various names.

bb1 wrote:Speaking of fish....Spudders has come out with a load of Dark Force WUM-mery, which naturally the pitchforkers are lapping up. It's one of those long twittertw@t things:

Mike Spudgun (@spudgun01)
Posted Sunday 14th August 2011 from Twitlonger


Just to elucidate the Marting Grime aspect and the Specialist dogs, Eddie & Keela. When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Just to elucidate the Marting Grime aspect and the Specialist dogs, Eddie & Keela. When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Grimes made it very clear that he was unhappy with what he referred to as his "treatment" by authorities unknown, (although he did say they were British), who had coerced him, he says, to "play down" the significance of the dogs' findings. Grimes let it be known that Eddies and Keelas 'scentings' were irrefutable, in his mind, having worked with the dogs successfully on very many cases for the many of the Constabularies in the UK on high profile cases.

Grimes stated that he was "instructed" to ensure that in his subsequently produced report, he was to emphasise that the dog's findings were inadmissable as evidence, (which is of course, true, but he had NEVER been instructed on any other case to point this out), and that they were effectively inconsequential without further corroborative evidence.

Birmingham FSS initially suggested in their reports that recovered material, as indicated in spots by the dogs, DID appear to have significant 'markers', consistent with Madeleine's profile. Of course, that initial report, (like so many initial reports in this case), was subsequently CHANGED!

But that's ANOTHER story for another day.......




'Story' is the correct word for it - as in Shaggy Dog Story.

Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Really? And this dynamite story never saw the light of day, because UK journos are all too terrified of Evil Clarrie to print it, even though it would be a career-maker?

Bollocks! If people believe that, they will believe anything. It's just more rubbish from Brat's crew.

It is about as true as Brat's story about the Express sub and the photo of the McCanns smiling; there wasn't a word of truth in that either. Maybe it is the same mystery 'sub-editor'?

Or maybe this 'sub-editor' is related to the 'Indian policeman' Brat invented?

Not to mention Brat's risible claims that his silly petition has Government backing, when it is merely on the government petitions site, along with all the demands to bring back public executions.

Still, I suppose it all helps to give them hope....

PMSL Bonny,

I never thought I would find one thicker than Bennett, but he takes the prize.
I'm sure a couple of emails to Martin and FFS will tell all.
He says the that initial report, (like so many initial reports in this case), was subsequently CHANGED!
Yeah we know that you numbnut, but only by Portuguese translators (who by the way are coming unstuck big time) Sorrybut I had to do it. F****g

spudgun01 Mike Spudgun
@
@veniviedivici Well, I could name him, but I'm not sure he would want me to. He certainly never published anything on the interview.



So, the beached whale has a 'friend' who is a 'sub-editor', who has info that could clear up the entire case, prove that the McCanns DONE IT, is sitting on the story of a lifetime, who is morally obliged to whistleblow-----

BUT HE WON'T PUBLISH IT?


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Pull the other one, Spudders, it's got bells on

Sheesh. The people out there with Positive Proof is enough to make your hair curl. Never in all my born days have I come across such a Perversion of Justice.
They must all be closet McCann supporters. There is no other logical explanation.

bb1 wrote:spudgun01 Mike Spudgun
@
@veniviedivici Well, I could name him, but I'm not sure he would want me to. He certainly never published anything on the interview.



So, the beached whale has a 'friend' who is a 'sub-editor', who has info that could clear up the entire case, prove that the McCanns DONE IT, is sitting on the story of a lifetime, who is morally obliged to whistleblow-----

BUT HE WON'T PUBLISH IT?


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Pull the other one, Spudders, it's got bells on

He can't publish it, can he? The McCanns control the worlds press, police, intelligence agencies everything. Spudders knows that......