When will the hounders publish the COLD accounts?

I ask, because, as with the Gonc fund, C.O.L.D seems to be shrouded in mystery - there has been nothing resembling an update on the Gonc fund for years now.

It now appears that the hilariously-named Campaign for Oppressed Libel Defendants is paying out to Bennett:


Tony could still be facing huge costs as a result of this case, the committee of the COLD campaign have agreed to assist his wife and family in light of what they must be going through at the moment.

All rather vague, isn't it? Maybe an Expert in Everything like Ena O' Forker should take a look at the COLD accounts, make sure there is no wrongdoing?

Absolutely. Let's face it, since they are so terribly concerned about accounts being correct, it would also apply to them.

Wouldn't it be hypocritical if it did not?

It sounds to me as though they will be dishing out Food Stamps. Or Postage Stamps. Depending on what Bennett did with all those stamps he got.

Did you notice something else she said?

I was informed that there was also a McCann supporter there, Justine Speer, I am not aware of any other McCann supporters being present but I stand to be corrected.

0/10 for observation, if she failed to notice just how many of the good guys were in court - how does she think we know what REALLY happened?

Not to mention those of us who couldn't attend watching the comings and goings on webcam.

PS - Who the H*ll is Justine Speer?

Oh, I ged it. They can't admit to giving money directly to Bennett in case Carter Ruck claim it as part of his income.
And doesn't it ever sniff of The Madeleine Fund and help to The McCann Family that they all so often shriek about.

PS. Are they paying Bennett's Mortgage? If he's got a Mortgage.

Probably pay to keep his shopping trolley roadworthy.

Strange how the cold site has disappeared, have they emptied the account for Bennett?
Oh and, have they informed the IRS and courts of the funds. Bennett did say to the judge about the lack of monies, did he not?

He/the Madeleine Foundation does not have charity status does he?

I am unsure how it works in UK but, if Bennett is fined and is unable to pay; can't the courts go after the Cold Fund?

I think so, Tony, I am not 100% sure. And remember that line in the hounderrules?

8. The Board of Directors reserves the right, however, to call on members for further membership fees should that prove necessary.

Fools, money, soon parted?

bb1 wrote:I think so, Tony, I am not 100% sure. And remember that line in the hounderrules?

8. The Board of Directors reserves the right, however, to call on members for further membership fees should that prove necessary.

Fools, money, soon parted?

That's right Bonny. This should be interesting.

The answer is no. Apart from anything else he does not have any beneficial interest.

People who support a defendant financially, to enable him to mount a defence or provide for his family, cannot face a call for further funds in the event of an award of costs or damages.

This does not however apply to those supporting a claimant or plaintiff. In the event that they lose, and costs are awarded against them, they could (potentially) face a call for further money.

The reasons for the distinction are pretty obvious.

Thanks, Jean-Pierre. I am sure they would be pleased to carry on pouring money down the drain even if there WAS a risk of penalties to themselves - they seem to have taken leave of their senses.

bb1 wrote:I think so, Tony, I am not 100% sure. And remember that line in the hounderrules?

8. The Board of Directors reserves the right, however, to call on members for further membership fees should that prove necessary.

Fools, money, soon parted?

"Fools, money, soon parted"

I am familiar with this expression. What interests me, though, is how they got together in the first place.......

Jean-Pierre.t50 wrote:The answer is no. Apart from anything else he does not have any beneficial interest.

People who support a defendant financially, to enable him to mount a defence or provide for his family, cannot face a call for further funds in the event of an award of costs or damages.

This does not however apply to those supporting a claimant or plaintiff. In the event that they lose, and costs are awarded against them, they could (potentially) face a call for further money.

The reasons for the distinction are pretty obvious.

Thanks Jean-Pierre.

So, what's happened to the COLD site?

http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post149620.html?sid=23136e46f3290d2e5bb5b9a2219187e3#p149620

Sounds like Ena O' Forker needs to Forensically Investigate their accounts.

sardinehater wrote:


Is there a way of contributing to the Cold Campaign? I tried the link under your post but the website seems dead.


Thanks for bringing this to my attention, it would seem that the web hosts are currently updating their servers. We are trying to sort this out will let you know when the website is up and running again.

What bad luck, it being offline just at this minute.

Is that why there is only a cache page?

Now now, Tony, don't you start doing all that 'logic' stuff on the hounders, you know they can't handle it.

Why, they idolise the idiot who sold a Reasons to Carter Ruck.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/i-have-read-it-all-now-bennett-sold.html



Oops, there go my ribs again.

bb1 wrote:Now now, Tony, don't you start doing all that 'logic' stuff on the hounders, you know they can't handle it.

Why, they idolise the idiot who sold a Reasons to Carter Ruck.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/i-have-read-it-all-now-bennett-sold.html



Oops, there go my ribs again.

Err tony there is an 'i' in D*ckhead or was that a deliberate mistake? LL

Lamplighter wrote:

bb1 wrote:Now now, Tony, don't you start doing all that 'logic' stuff on the hounders, you know they can't handle it.

Why, they idolise the idiot who sold a Reasons to Carter Ruck.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/i-have-read-it-all-now-bennett-sold.html



Oops, there go my ribs again.

Err tony there is an 'i' in D*ckhead or was that a deliberate mistake? LL

No mistake, I was being polite

crazytony wrote:

Lamplighter wrote:

bb1 wrote:Now now, Tony, don't you start doing all that 'logic' stuff on the hounders, you know they can't handle it.

Why, they idolise the idiot who sold a Reasons to Carter Ruck.

http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/i-have-read-it-all-now-bennett-sold.html



Oops, there go my ribs again.

Err tony there is an 'i' in D*ckhead or was that a deliberate mistake? LL

No mistake, I was being polite

don't tell me, there is another one of those mysterious fires at the server place like there was when the 3A's first database stealing first happened.......these things always happen at pivotal moments don't they?

Yes, when in doubt, pretend your server is mysteriously 'offline'. Or, if you want to really fool the paranoid loonies who are devoted to you, take it offline yourself and pretend there has been a DOS attack.

I think the site is now available again. I've no idea whether what was posted on Havern's forum bears any resemblance to truth or there was some other reason for the site being down just as Bennett's big moment in court was taking place.