BENNETT ABUSING NEW MEMBER OF HIS FORUM

[bb1]

Baffled onlookers have no idea what is wrong with Bennett; someone or other joined his forum, made a reasonable, polite, opening post...and then all Hell broke loose.

Havern and others started interogating the newbie, then Bennett steamed in doing an impersonation of Herr Flick...You vil obey my orders!!!


A criticism of 'crumb'
Tony Bennett Today

A REPLY TO CRUMB

I'm open to criticism

REPLY: That's good. I criticise you for coming on here claiming that Madeleine was abducted without producing a scrap of evidence to back it up. It will save a great deal of time if you now priduce in sumamry form the evidence you have that Madeleine was abducted. In doing so you will need to explain why the trained cadaver dogs of one of the world's top dog handlers alerted to the scent of a corpse in the living-romm of the McCanns' apartment, in the McCann's master bedrrom, on the verand and in the garden, on two of Dr Kate McCann's clothes, on one of the children's T-shirts, on Cuddle Cat, and on the key and on the floor of the Renault Scenic the McCanns hired. Unless you start by doing all of that, debating with you is useless.

I look at the evidence and the scenario surrounding Maddie's disappearance and I have drawn my conclusions from my observations.

REPLY: Ah! Good. Then what is the evidence, and please lay out your 'observations'.

I have empirical evidence about British families on holiday which may put this case into context - or may not.

REPLY: Almost certainly not. But by all means publish your 'emorical evidence' for us to have a look at.

I hope that some of you are willing to debate this.

REPLY: The start point for this 'debate' must be the evidence you rely on for the belief that Madeleine was abducted.

I simply want to debate the case with anyone who is interested in engaging with me.

REPLY: We shall see in due course how true this claim is.

I am absolutely firm in my belief that this is a case of a child who was taken by a stranger.

REPLY: To be 'absolutely firm' in your belief will require powerful evidence in support of it and would also suggest that you are not willing to change your mind if facts are presented to you in this debate.

I would never have left my baby twins alone in a holiday apartment - fire, choking, vomiting, falling - you name it. That clearly doesn't equate to the parents being directly responsible for the death of their child.

REPLY: Who then is responsible if, in those circumstances, a child e.g. chokes on his own vomit or falls down the stairs and has a fatal accident?

I probably don't have the in-depth knowledge of every nuance of this case…


REPLY: But you've told us that you are 'absolutely firm' in your belief, so what is the point of your finding out 'nuances' and 'facts' on here?

I'm out of practice re responding to posts (purely technologically)...please put me right if I post in the wrong places. It takes a while to work one's way around these forums.

REPLY: Don't worry. Just set out in concise terms, right now on this very thread, a summary of why you are 'absolutely firm' in your belief that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.



======================

Who the feck does Bennett think he is? Head of the Truthseeker Gestapo?

Or has he been on the falling-down juice already

[bb1]

Spelling Police here! What are

priduce in sumamry form

living-romm

bedrrom

verand

emorical


Supposed to mean? Dunce's cap for Bennett!

Yours,

the Next of Vipers

[Sabot]

Jeez, if that isn't offensive I don't know what is. And they wonder why some Pros reply in kind. I always tried very hard not to be offensive, but twas mortal hard.

[Sabot]

Spelling Police here! What are

priduce in sumamry form

living-romm

bedrrom

verand

emorical


Supposed to mean? Dunce's cap for Bennett!

Yours,

the Next of Vipers

This is a sign of a short circuit in the brain. Remember the days when he was forever correcting people?

[bb1]

It's beyond rude, Sabot - if Bennett tries that in the High Court, he will be sent to the cells to cool down.

There was no need whatsoever for him to steam in like that because someone dared to disagree with him.

It wasn't even an aggressive OP; Bennett was the aggressor.

They really are all the same as soon as you scratch the surface, aren't they?

[Sabot]

This is what is so frustrating about it all, Bonny. They seem unable to see how offensive they all are. This isn't debating. It's bullying and intimidation, and I must say that it worked on me in the beginning, as it did on a lot of people. This is why they got away with the shit for so long.

[bb1]

That's an excellent point, Sabot. We've all seen their demands that people 'debate' with them - but it is frankly pointless.

Their idea of 'debate' is posting a bunch of demonstrable falsehoods, then throwing a tanty when it is pointed out that they are wrong, as they would know if they ever bothered to read the police files.

They then throw an even bigger tanty and accuse the other 'debater' of being Gerry McCann/a paid chimp/Clarrie/ a member of Common Purpose/ a mason.

Half-cut is one of the worst, with her four-letter abuse and remarks about monkeys.

There is no point in talking to them; apart from anything else, what is there left to debate?

You either believe in the rule of law, and the right of innocent people to the protection of the law, or you don't.

They don't - they are nothing but an internet lynch mob under all their pretendy 'debating'.

[Sabot]

I just wish I could figure out why they do it. They must know that they are twisting things, when they aren't actually telling downright lies.

I sometimes wish Bennett could be called upon to prove his claims, but I doubt that this will happen.

On the other hand, I suppose he might be given a chance to prove his claims against Ed Smethurst. It certainly isn't "Fair Comment" to accuse Ed Smethurst of mixing with Paedophiles, especially as these so called friends probably don't even exist.
And if they do then Bennett could well get sued by them as well.

[rhodes]

Bennett sounds panicked, angry and seems to be losing it lol. Must have a few things on his warped mind at the minute. lol.

quite, so it's time to ratchet up the pressure on him...where is Murat Fan

[Pedro Silva]

This proves again what we already know:

TB don´t allow beliefs (with true evidences) which are contrary to the crap inside TB´s filthy brain

TB´s brain will soon implode.

[lily]

Bennett sounds panicked, angry and seems to be losing it lol. Must have a few things on his warped mind at the minute. lol.

quite, so it's time to ratchet up the pressure on him...where is Murat Fan

I'll say that he sounds like he's losing it. I've noticed how his spelling goes downhill at a high rate of speed when that happens.

Yep, where is mf?

[crazytony]

priduce in sumamry form
Means lions with some mammarys.

[Sabot]

Bennett is feeling Victimised, poor dear. Slagged off, accused, abused, and generally being made mock of. A bit like wot he dun to The McCanns, only not so bad. Yet.

We might not get to see The Trials, but there are bound to be transcripts which we can pour over and dissect to out heart's content. Preferably where they can all see what we have to say.
I just wish they would hurry up. Four years is a long time to wait for Justice for The McCanns, even if only in part.

[lily]

priduce in sumamry form
Means lions with some mammarys.

Ah, of course it does, Tony.


I wonder if Bennett has heard more about his multitude of legal woes and that has made him rattled? I suppose that the Sun's troll articles hasn't helped either.

[lily]

Bennett is feeling Victimised, poor dear. Slagged off, accused, abused, and generally being made mock of. A bit like wot he dun to The McCanns, only not so bad. Yet.

We might not get to see The Trials, but there are bound to be transcripts which we can pour over and dissect to out heart's content. Preferably where they can all see what we have to say.
I just wish they would hurry up. Four years is a long time to wait for Justice for The McCanns, even if only in part.

Ooooooh, that sounds like something we can 'investigate' Sabot. I do hope someone can go to the proceedings so we can get a run down on facial and body language.

[crazytony]

priduce in sumamry form
Means lions with some mammarys.

Ah, of course it does, Tony.


I wonder if Bennett has heard more about his multitude of legal woes and that has made him rattled? I suppose that the Sun's troll articles hasn't helped either.

Now police are looking at twitter

[bb1]

They should have been doing that long ago, Tony - there are some very, very nasty people abusing Madeleine and her family on it.

I wonder what the media think of the Hindley Fan's tweets?

[Sabot]

I have actually read Bennett's post in full, several times. This is a first for me.
And the more I read it the worse it gets. This post is the epitemy of bully boy tactics in answer to a perfectly polite OP.

[bb1]

It's shocking, isn't it? I suspect it may be an indication of clear mental deterioration. If Bennett carries on like that in court, he will be sent to the cells for contempt.

[Sabot]

Bennett is feeling Victimised, poor dear. Slagged off, accused, abused, and generally being made mock of. A bit like wot he dun to The McCanns, only not so bad. Yet.

We might not get to see The Trials, but there are bound to be transcripts which we can pour over and dissect to out heart's content. Preferably where they can all see what we have to say.
I just wish they would hurry up. Four years is a long time to wait for Justice for The McCanns, even if only in part.

Ooooooh, that sounds like something we can 'investigate' Sabot. I do hope someone can go to the proceedings so we can get a run down on facial and body language.

You won't like it, Lily. Bennett grovelling is worse than Bennett attacking, if this is at all possible.

Actually, I don't think Tweeting is allowed in British Courts, more's the pity. But The Transcripts will be good. I can promise you that.

[Sabot]

It's shocking, isn't it? I suspect it may be an indication of clear mental deterioration. If Bennett carries on like that in court, he will be sent to the cells for contempt.

Something very odd is going on inside his head, Bonny. I know he's disgusting but he isn't usually that aggressive, at least not in public. It makes you wonder what goes on behind closed doors.
I never have understood why Mrs. Bennett puts up with the obvious risk to her home.

[bb1]

I see from:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/topic1258.html

that he has corrected most of those bizarre spelling mistakes; he gave every impression of being in a blind rage when he hit Submit on that post..

[Sabot]

I see from:

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/topic1258.html

that he has corrected most of those bizarre spelling mistakes; he gave every impression of being in a blind rage when he hit Submit on that post..

Perhaps he isn't sleeping very well. Or perhaps he's worried about Mrs. Bennett escaping with her half of the spoils.

[lily]

I think he's stressed beyond his limits at the moment.

He didn't have to take the road to ruin. He has absolutely no one else to blame but himself.

[lily]

[quote="Sabot"]

Bennett is feeling Victimised, poor dear. Slagged off, accused, abused, and generally being made mock of. A bit like wot he dun to The McCanns, only not so bad. Yet.

We might not get to see The Trials, but there are bound to be transcripts which we can pour over and dissect to out heart's content. Preferably where they can all see what we have to say.
I just wish they would hurry up. Four years is a long time to wait for Justice for The McCanns, even if only in part.

Ooooooh, that sounds like something we can 'investigate' Sabot. I do hope someone can go to the proceedings so we can get a run down on facial and body language.

You won't like it, Lily. Bennett grovelling is worse than Bennett attacking, if this is at all possible.

Oh, I don't know, Sabot. We may get lots of mileage out of it. We can do post after post about how he answered incorrectly. What he should have said if he was innocent. Think about what we can say about his crocodile tears?

[Sponsored content]