Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Corruption in Portimao and Portugal
Yesterday at 11:01 pm by Max

» Jerry Lewis, Mercurial Comedian and Filmmaker, Dies at 91
Yesterday at 9:20 pm by bb1

» Terrrorist attack in Barcelona
Yesterday at 9:19 pm by bb1

» U.S. Warship Indianapolis Found 18,000 Feet Deep in Pacific Ocean
Yesterday at 5:50 pm by Pedro Silva

» Military coup underway in Turkey
Yesterday at 4:20 pm by bb1

» THE TRUMP DISASTER AREA
Yesterday at 9:05 am by bb1

» BREXIT: UP-TO-DATE NEWS AS IT HAPPENS
Yesterday at 7:36 am by Lamplighter

» Several wounded in Russian knife attack, attacker shot dead
Sat Aug 19, 2017 9:40 pm by bb1

» Candles site
Sat Aug 19, 2017 9:13 pm by Pedro Silva

Navigation
 Portal
 Index
 Memberlist
 Profile
 FAQ
 Search
Affiliates
free forum


Smiffy Says Something

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:18 pm

It's on McCannfiles:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html

By John Blacksmith
Tuesday, 28 June 2011 at 09:10

Madeleine as a primary source & historical record


It goes on. And on. And on.

I found myself suffering from bleeding-eye-itis, so didn't actually read much of it.

It ends with:

as a historical record Kate McCann's Madeleine is self-serving and worthless.

Which really tells you everything you need to know about it; it's just more pitchforking.



Last edited by bb1 on Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:58 pm; edited 2 times in total
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:19 pm

On the subject of smiffy, remember when he declared war on Portugal?

For some time, however, on the Joana Morais and MCF sites you have allowed, unmoderated, persistent personal attacks on me, mostly, it seems, from Portuguese posters, claiming, among other things, that I had no factual basis for my comments and that they were some sort of vendetta against GA or the Portuguese.

And these comments have been amplified elsewhere.You know what a good friend of Portugal I have been. You knew perfectly well that the majority of the Portuguese information I posted from beginning to end was provided by Goncalo Amaral and yourself, with subsidiary input and documentation from others, including members of the PJ, officer De Freitas and lawyers associated with the case, for example. Furthermore I remind you that before publication of recent posts I repeatedly asked for the evidence from GA of political interference by the UK, none of which he was able to provide. At no time has anyone on those two sites made any attempt to point out to the more hysterical of your posters, even tactfully and anonymously, the true origin of much of my information.

I could not do so myself without breaching confidentiality and good faith. As a result the clear impression has been given, and allowed to stand by you and your colleagues, that I am one of those fraudsters like Bennett and Levy – both of whom have been protected from any criticism at all on your sites - who aggrandise themselves with pretend sources, lies and rumours. I am sorry but I am not willing to accept that insult to my reputation unchallenged.


Read more: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:MfF0xhZkUE4J:justathoughtyouknow.proboards.com/index.cgi%3Fboard%3Dguests%26action%3Ddisplay%26thread%3D879%26page%3D9+smiffy+declares+war+on+portugal&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&source=www.google.co.uk#ixzz1Ql0lgW40
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:23 pm

Then there was the blog post he hastily removed:

Sunday, 24 October 2010

Dear, dear

At the Bureau we no longer bother with the media much these days. Why? Because as far as the Madeleine McCann case is concerned it is quite clear that they will always follow, never lead. The fond hope of the internet forums that the media will somehow “break” the case, either by digging up new facts or by bringing news of significant events to the public that will somehow turn the population against the Dirty Pair is, in our view, just another illusion.

There is no secret injunction, no shadowy political protection, no ban by the Murdoch group. We don’t believe there ever was interference from the UK, come to that, no, not even from Ambassador Buck, that charming and, above all honest, civil servant, but that’s another story. The media are quiet because, despite the myths, they have all along responded to events, not initiated them, and at the moment nobody is trying to use them. Not even the McCanns.

The media did not make the Madeleine story: Gerry McCann did that, using them in such a professional way that media people are still locked in admiration for his achievements. When the PJ, its suspicions growing, began itself to use the media, by selective leaking, the press dutifully defamed the pair, covering themselves, as they thought, by allowing sob-sister “we’ve all done it” pieces to sit alongside the libels. That came to an end in October 2007 when Brian Kennedy’s money – you got it wrong Brian - allowed the assembled support team to be next in line to use them, with writs, threats of writs and a propaganda offensive.Kennedy’s tame lawyer, Smethurst, was, as we know, frank about this episode, saying on Panorama – which of course he and his colleagues were using - that their aim was to “expunge” the idea of parental guilt from the public’s minds.
That period ended in July 2008. With the publication of the Prosecutors’ archiving report the Portuguese, with one heroic exception, washed their hands of the case.Nobody save the McCanns wanted to use the media any more.
That is how the modern media works: it responds to whoever is trying to use it most effectively. Yet the myth of the investigative, digging journalist, the Woodward and Bernstein crap, persists, along with the bizarre habit of quoting “news” stories as evidence, that “they” know more than “we” do.

This was brought home over the last few days when a junksheet called the Algarve Resident was quoted by the dwindling number of boobies who believe in the McCanns as “evidence” about the Amaral book verdict. The AR, like its sister papers in Portugal, is for UK expatriates who are too thick or lazy to learn Portuguese; it is a pure scissors and paste job copying news stories from the UK press (because they can’t speak Portuguese either). In this case they copied and pasted the Guardian – who had taken the story, since they haven’t yet seen the judgement - from the Portuguese press!

The Guardian hasn’t seen the judgement because it hasn’t been officially released. Even by printing the little they did they were taking a chance since their lawyers, lacking a copy of the judgement, have been unable to guarantee that the paper’s report is a fair and accurate assessment. The rest of the media are in the same boat: without a full copy they would be wide open – and rightly, under UK law - to action from Carter Ruck.

For the verdict makes no immediate difference to libel in the UK. If the Truth of the Lie was published in the UK tomorrow the fact that it has been cleared for sale by a Portuguese court would not help in the slightest against a libel writ.

Ah, but there’s the rub: “immediate”. Because, boy, will it do so in the future.

We dealt with the appeal court judgement in two posts. One, titled “He made it”, dealt with the dependence of the McCanns and their lawyers on the Prosecutors’ archiving report to succeed in any libel case against Amaral, whether here or in Portugal.
The excerpts we gave related specifically to that preceding post. They were the evidence and justification for our claim that:

1) The McCanns’ libel claim is based almost entirely on the Prosecutors’ report.

2) The verdict destroys any chance of using it as a statement of truth or a legal finding of innocence. It is not a statement of truth, the judges state, it is an interpretation, something quite different.

We have no intention of getting the volunteers who make up the Bureau into trouble by quoting the entire verdict verbatim, much though our enemies would wish it, just as we never betrayed the trust of the various people who provided us with the case papers, the rogatory interviews, the Scotland Yard decisions on officer de Freitas and, oh yes, the Tanner Murat court case. All them before the media got anywhere near them.

The full verdict will be available soon enough and then, as always, people can make up their own minds.

We have no hesitation in repeating, without any hopes or illusions, that the verdict destroys the chances of the McCanns winning a libel case against Amaral. But, friend or foe of the Bureau, don’t take our word for it: ask yourself the question -when did Team McCann ever fail to have a comment ready at critical stages of the affair? When was that disgusting, bewigged, liar Mitchell unable to respond? Until last week it hadn’t happened since May 3 2007. That tells you all you need to know about how serious, or rather lethal, is the setback they have suffered.
Posted by john blacksmith at 21:54



Of course, he wrote - and removed - that before Gonc's criminal conviction for LYING was confirmed...
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 12:28 pm

And who could forget smiffy's description of Bennett at the House of Commons?

The Alice in Wonderland effect was enhanced by the sight of McCann being flanked on both sides by the unlovely, indeed grotesque, bookends of Adam Tudor Smith and Clarence Mitchell, while a tall balding tramp who had apparently wandered in from the street sat behind all three, alternately fixing them with a crazed stare or scribbling on a dog-eared notepad, perhaps drawing pictures for his own pleasure of a skimpily dressed Madeleine.

Then, of course, there was his snafu recently when he trumpeted that the Leicester police were not entirely sure that the McCanns were innocent..


WITHOUT LOOKING AT THE DATE

Because of course, if he had done, smiffy would have known that it was prior to the McCanns being cleared by the Portuguese Attorney General.

What a rascal smiffy is!
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:26 pm

For some unfathomable reason, another piece has appeared in smiffy's sideboard:

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/

with this message:

“Madeleine” by Kate McCann
This post, one of three reviewing Kate McCann’s book in detail, was intended for the McCann Files since I no longer blog here. Unfortunately, and due to my own stupidity, I sent MF the wrong file – a first draft. For the moment that cannot be amended or withdrawn.

There are significant differences between the two versions and I don’t wish to waste people’s time so I’m posting the correct one here to save them the trouble of wading through a very long piece only to find (assuming they’re interested) they then have to read another, equally long one.

McCann Files will no doubt be updated soon. Let’s hope Nigel forgives me.


So, whatever is on Dr Rob.....redquare's site is, in fact, wrong. Or something.
Personally, I value my eyesight too much to wade through either to find out.

Suffice to say, the latest version ends:

As a historical record Kate McCann’s Madeleine is, as we have seen, self-serving and actively resistant to the truth. It is worthless

So it is still just pitchforking nonsense from smiffy.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  lily on Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:44 pm

Kate McCann's Madeleine is self-serving and worthless

He had to reword the above no matter what else he has written. mad
avatar
lily
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:12 pm

For some strange reason, I cannot actually bring myself to read either version, Lily biggrin
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  lily on Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:15 pm

Bonny, I haven't wasted my time reading it either but I did read that.

It makes it sound as though Madeleine herself is self-serving and worthless. mad
avatar
lily
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:25 pm

Remember how smiffy flounced off? Well, he's flounced back - who'd have seen that coming biggrin

Another yawnathon, in which smiffy makes his jealousy of SUCCESSFUL journos clear, has fallen out of his kitchen cupboard.

It's here:

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/2011/08/things-are-going-rather-well.html

in the unlikely event that anyone is interested.

It's called:

Things are going rather well

It goes, Piers Morgan, blah blah blah, McCanns, blah blah blah, Murdoch, blah blah blah, McCanns, blah blah blah, Piers Morgan, blah blah blah, Gordon Brown, blah blah blah, Kier Simmons, blah blah blah.

Smiffy's jealous streak is well to the fore by the end...

Quite what the impact will be on the media when the inevitable happens and the parents are unmasked – courtesy of Amaral and Leicester police – we do not know. Individually they will manage: neither Keir Simmons nor the rest will lose their jobs and others will simply slip by, hoping the public will forget what they once said or wrote. But the fact that their great rivals, the wicked people of the internet, the fantasists, the haters, were nearer to the truth than the supposed experts of the overground media, will deliver a nasty blow to their credibility, and hence their wallets, at roughly the same time as the new measures regarding relations with the government and the police are introduced.

Goodness, it will be such fun to mock them.


In his dreams.
In the real world:

Piers Morgan is still rich and successful and smiffy is a boring blogger.
Kier Simmons is still rich and successful and smiffy is a boring blogger.

The McCanns are still innocent, and will continue to be innocent.

Amoral is still a convicted criminal on track for more legal trouble.

Oh, and smiffy is still a boring hateblogger. Pcorneater

_________________
__________________________

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories
. -Neil Tweedie, Daily Mail, of the McCanns' tormentor Gonzo.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:55 pm

Smiffy been smokin' weed again?

When the overground media turned the McCanns into helpless martyrs Gordon joined the party, anxious to show that he was a human being with human sympathies rather than a tight-arsed, tight crutched, Scotch intriguer with a cucumber stuck up his rectum, well worthy of the therapist’s couch. As usual his decision making was wrong, his insight into people zero: he not only backed a couple of lying chancers but he failed to see that the Madeleine affair – the so-called “biggest story of our times” – was in fact a death ride for the press and a tipping point for the rest of the overground media.

Ignoring his grossly unpleasant language....what on earth is he talking about? The one group of people NOT involved in this are the McCann family and friends....is he doing that 'forgetting' thing?

_________________
__________________________

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories
. -Neil Tweedie, Daily Mail, of the McCanns' tormentor Gonzo.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:56 pm

Smiffy isn't the only one on the weed:

RothleyPillow Rothley Pillowcase
@
@UnterdenTeppich The investigative skills of bloggers like #Blacksmith PROVE THERE'S NO ABSOLUTE NEED for mainstream media anymore #mccann


rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

_________________
__________________________

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories
. -Neil Tweedie, Daily Mail, of the McCanns' tormentor Gonzo.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  lily on Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:09 pm

Eek rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl
avatar
lily
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:54 pm

Oh dear, a tin of rancid spam left over from the Great Portugee War has now fallen out of smiffy's kitchen cupboard.
He starts off by insulting the Attorney General of Portugal:

We all know that the McCanns’ libel lawyers attempted unsuccessfully to use the statement of the unfortunate Portuguese Attorney-General about the McCanns as a judicial finding rather than the mere opinion of a law officer.

So, not the binding legal decision of just about the most senior law official in Portugal, then? I see.

And proceeds to make up a load of rubbish, as in:

Again, the time warp plays its role: events since 2010 don’t seem to have happened – no Lisbon court case finally destroying the McCann story that Amaral was a lone rogue cop; no appeal court verdict devaluing the prosecutor’s “exoneration” – parroted by the Attorney-General – as a mere interpretation; no foreign office cables confirming the British role in making the McCanns the chief suspects; no admissions by Kate McCann that her husband wanted to confess to disposing of Madeleine’s body; nor that he felt the game was up to such an extent that he wanted to bundle the kids into a hire car and flee across the border – to Spain, she says, though it might have been Gibraltar

That is complete and utter sh*te; reasonable persons can only assume that smiffy was trippin' on aceed when he wrote it. I suspect it is also libel, but smiffy is so clearly under the influence of something, no-one will pay any attention.

And concludes with a load of meaningless waffle which makes him sound as if he is in a primary school playground.

Hahau Hahau Hahau Hahau

_________________
__________________________

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories
. -Neil Tweedie, Daily Mail, of the McCanns' tormentor Gonzo.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  bb1 on Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:57 pm

Smiffy didn't really think it through when he made that pile of poo up, did he? Because he seems to have forgotten that Spain is in Europe, and Gibraltar is British......

_________________
__________________________

Few will weep tears for Amaral, seeing an angry man locked up in his own bitter and baseless theories
. -Neil Tweedie, Daily Mail, of the McCanns' tormentor Gonzo.
avatar
bb1
Slayer of scums
Slayer of scums

Location : watcher on the wall
Join date : 2011-06-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Smiffy Says Something

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum