Before I start, I feel it's only fair to warn you that I accept no responsibility for any dryness of the mouth, caused from standing agog in disbelief at the words of a mad dictator, affectionately known as textusa.
For several months now, the blogger with a bee in their bonnet, has been on a mission - a mission to discredit and deceive. For our tale to begin, we don't have to go too far back in time - which is handy, because trust me, nobody but nobody should subject themselves to the mind boggling bollocks, that textusa has decided to spout each and every day.
For this particular entry, we'll start on the 7th April 2018. It was on this day, that textusa took it upon themselves, as they so often do, to attempt to frame an 'anti McCann'. The anti in question, had made comments expressing their dislike for the textusa blogs. Textusa will tell you that the person in question is entitled to that opinion. What they won't tell you however, is that anyone daring to express that view, will also be subjected to a campaign of disgusting and downright dangerous games.
Twitter users on #McCann may remember an account named Orlov.
They might also remember textusa attempting to frame that account as being a vile pro McCann, who goes by the name of "Michael Walker". For many weeks prior to textusa's false outing, I'd stopped reading the blog, as had many. I was sick of reading posts that were presented as being focused on the case, but in reality, were becoming increasingly obsessed with clumsy, indecipherable nonsense, about the account of the aforementioned "Walker".
Having seen the 'error' textusa had made regarding the Orlov account, I decided to contact them. This was my message - which textusa gave consent for me to share - followed with textusa's reply:
Now you may be asking what public stance I apparently made against textusa, a stance so bad, that they had no wish to understand their error - we'll get to that shortly.
Before that though, it's very important - oh sooo important - to know that rather than do the right thing and find out how they had made a mistake, textusa chose to ignore my words, and carry on with what could now be considered a lie.
Having had no joy with textusa, I decided to defend my friend publicly, - much to the annoyance of the liar in chief. If you have a pair of hypocrisy goggles, you may wish to put them on now.
Don't take those goggles off just yet though, because in a bizarre move, and faced with Orlov also defending himself against the slurs, textusa decided it was time to move on. No apology, no correction, just "Let's move on"
...and move on it did, for all of 10 hours 32 minutes:
Textusa - furious that someone had dared to correct them - then began to display the signs of being the nasty little stalker that it is. I'll put their words in orange - the last thing I want is for people to confuse my own, with those of that unhinged lunatic:
"Let’s be clear here and stop something that is starting to be insinuated here: that Ben Thompson is a pro."
It's important (isn't it), that nowhere on the blog, had anybody accused me of being a pro, the above comment was Textusa sowing seeds, whilst pretending to pull weeds.
"Let’s separate emotion from reason and say what is factual and what is emotional.
Emotionally, what separates us from Mr Thompson is that we found unacceptable to continue to be part of a FB group of which he’s admin, after he expressed what we had written was a waste of time."
Oh, the comment again. The comment that according to textusa, was far worse than falsely accusing an anti of being a vile pro, simply because they didn't agree with the shite they put into their blog.
"Again, we do not contest that opinion how much we may, and evidently do, disagree with it. He’s entitled to disdain what we write and we’re entitled to not appreciate his disdain and for after having shown it, thinking I would welcome him as if he had said nothing.
And because of that lack of appreciation we also have the right of not wanting to maintain any sort of friendly relationship with Mr Thompson as we fully understand that after I refused to interact with him, that he also feels the same.
You've been waking up with my name in your head each day - in fact barely a day goes by when you don't mention me, or demand I answer your pitiful questions, but ok, you refused to interact.
"As things have escalated out of control"
Out of control you say? Well that would make your teeth itch.
"I have shared with team the entire private conversation and outside being reprimanded for using a swear word within context, I have faced no criticism and they have found the exchange to be quite interesting and reason they keep encouraging me to encourage Mr Thompson to share it with those supporters closest to him.
I and Mr Thompson are 2 people who due to circumstances have fallen out.
After observing you stalking, lying, and conning your readers, all I can say is - not before time.
That’s the emotional part. Let’s get to facts."
For the record, textusa wouldn't know a fact if it made an appointment, confirmed the appointment, arrived on time, introduced itself, showed its ID (which she'd probably contest), and discussed it's life history of being a fact.
"We see, at least at this point in time, no reason to claim Mr Thompson to be a pro pretending to be an anti. And refuse such suggestion as valid."
Again, nobody said I was a pro. You know I'm not, and yet here you are, sowing your nasty little seeds.
"Not even his latest cosing up with Insane which we think to have been a huge mistake on his part."
"Insane" is a name textusa has made up.
"He thinks that Walkercan1000 is not Mr Michael Wright. We have never claimed we did, as he has recognised, nor will give an opinion about that. We have reasons for not doing so.
Of course you do.
"We say that Walkercan1000 is Not Textusa. Mr Thompson seems to think otherwise. He’s entitled to his opinion, as we are to ours."
Yes you do, and you're completely wrong - you know that though.
"Once we think that Walkercan1000 is Not Textusa and since Tigger – a name Mr Thompson brought into the discussion, not us – is a huge NT fan, we say that by association Tigger supports Walkercan1000."
Oh, you've decided to drag another anti into your lies - Tigger can't stand your blog either, no coincidence then, that you also tried to attach them to the Walker account - it's what you do to all your detractors. In fact you tried to tell me Tigger was also a pro, months ago. You were wrong then, and you're still wrong now.
"Walkercan1000 and Not Textusa have basically 1 difference: the first says the dogs are useless and the second that the cadaver scent dog is wonderful (however the scent he picked up inside the apartment is not from the apartment) but the blood dog should best go play playstation because we are still to know what Insane thinks Keela signalled inside the apartment."
This is utter rubbish, and an insult to anyone who reads your blog. Not Textusa, who I shall refer to as "NT", has never said the scent Eddie picked up, wasn't in the apartment. That's just a lie textusa has invented to discredit NT. What NT actually said was exactly the same as Martin Grime stated.
Martin Grime: "If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief."
However, Walkercan1000 and Not Textusa share one very important thing: they both STATE there was NO BLOOD found in the apartment.
You really are terminally stupid.
We think Meerkat is the twitter handle that Insane now uses, after having had the Walkercan1000 account taken off his hands (he was allowed for 4:40 minutes to re-use on March 11 but that was to achieve an objective). Mr Thompson believes, even states he has absolutely certainty that is not the case."
Absolute certainty, yes. As does anyone without an agenda to frame those they consider to be the enemy.
A mere two hours later, and it appears textusa has had a bang on the head that's caused amnesia. First they quoted one of my tweets:
"Interesting that you claim to know the details of my contact with Text, given that it was via PM, although we shared many private conversations since 2014, and supported her until she falsely accused a friend, it was hardly an HFWL scenario. Tomorrow is another day. Goodnight :)"
"This is a serious accusation.
Mr Ben Thompson please say who is the friend you allege I’ve falsely accused and say very clearly what was the false accusation you allege I’ve made."
They're actually pretending that they have no idea what I'm referring to. All of this had so far, been over a period of 48 hours, and yet they're actually trying to plead ignorance.
My reply:
"This will be my last reply to you Text (sadly it wasn't), as I'm slowly losing the will to live.
Firstly I will address your last question, the answer to which I should have thought would be pertinently obvious, given that it was what kicked all this toing and froing off in the first place.
To quote you:
'This is a serious accusation. Mr Ben Thompson please say who is the friend you allege I’ve falsely accused and say very clearly what was the false accusation you allege I’ve made.'
I am at a loss as to why you would ask this, given that this was the message I sent you on Saturday evening (my words so there's no breach of privacy)
'Hi. Firstly, how are you? Well I hope.
Just been reading your latest blog. I see you've come to the conclusion that Alexsander Orlov "the meerkat" on Twitter, is the Insane character. I can guarantee 100% that they're not. I've known the person behind the meerkat acct for over 4 years. I've spoken to them personally, worked with them, and know exactly who they are. I'm sure you'll understand me keeping their identity to myself, as I'm not one to break a confidence. I thought it best to pm though, as I don't want to get involved in a public debate over it. Just hope you take me at my word, and correct the misinfo.'
Given that you also claim that "Insane" "Not Textusa" and "Walkercan" are the same person, I'm sure your readers will understand why I contacted you privately to try to address the matter. I know very little of the "Not Textusa" character (correct at the time of writing), other than a few blogs I read last night of theirs. I only looked having been notified that I (without being named) featured in their latest piece.
The person who owns the Meerkat account, has been a very dear friend to me to me for over four years. You might not like their humour, you might not like that they mock your blog - indeed they asked me if I would like them to ease off on their ribbing of your pieces. Had you listened to me, or even absorbed any of what I said, I may well have suggested that be for the best.
The Walker account has:
Accused many antis of being paedophiles.
Threatened people with legal action.
Tweeted death threats.
Lied about the case on a repetitive, perpetual, and daily basis.
Disgustingly mocked Brenda Leyland, (an anti that everyone should be aware of after her tragic death) and her family.
That being said, and given my close friendship with the person you falsely accused, can you blame me for attempting to correct you?
You however, told me "you know fuck all".
You didn't ask for any further information on what I may or may not know (having already decided in your own head, that I know "fuck all") regarding the Walker account. A shame, as having done my own, and observed the research of others, I do possess pieces of the jigsaw, and could have helped you, had you of course truly wanted to get to the truth.
The reason behind your stance, being that you feel you were insulted in our group.
You simply cannot see that what people had been saying in their comments, was perfectly reasonable. You have of late indulged in an obsessive need to include references to the Walker account, shoehorning them into a string of blogs, the subject matter being totally lost on many, amongst an ocean of quotes from someone many are either uninterested in, or do not understand the history of. That is why many were turned off by your musings.
It had nothing to do with your views on Gemma O'Doherty, Colin Sutton, or anyone else you choose to blame.
Text, we supported you week in week out, always promoting your blogs, and giving members the option to read them, we did that for four long years. Not everyone in the group agreed with all that you wrote, many won't have even clicked the link, as happens with all blogs, but we supported you, and your right to be heard. Until last night, I even promoted your blog on my own.
From sheer stubbornness, ego, arrogance, call it what you like, you couldn't accept the fact that with the ongoing inclusion of the Walker nonsense, people were simply not interested - after all, the majority of people just want facts, or theories based around the case. You took members' comments to be insulting - they weren't, they were honest.
That is why you didn't welcome my correction, and that is why you had what I described as a 'diva fit', when I contacted you politely - something we've both done since we first had contact four years ago.
You chose not to discuss the matter further, and so as I told you I would, I used a public platform to let it be known you were wrong about my friend.
You say my accusation was serious, but it was true.
Your accusation was far worse, potentially dangerous, and absolutely untrue.
Having been a victim of dangerous and false accusations myself, perhaps you might now, have a better understanding of why I contacted you. Had you left your bruised ego hung on the peg, and at least heard me out, instead of planting a patronising and petulant response, none of this would have happened, and you could have carried on discussing your theories on the case.
To conclude, as I will not be returning without a full apology:
You falsely accused a good friend and staunch anti, of being the most disgusting pro McCann troll around.
You were completely wrong to do so."
The Comment
Ah yes, the comment. A comment I made, that textusa classed as an insult, and worthy of the truth becoming of no importance:
"I’m not even going to bother. I’ve had a scan and the weekly obsession with Walker is a complete turn-off. Total waste of time, and exactly what they want. Disappointing.”
Perfectly reasonable, accurate, and deserving. Many have since complained that reading textusa's blog has, due to its off-piste and totally inaccurate content, become a "total waste of time" - actually many have said so for years, but that's by the by.
That, THAT comment, has been the entire reason for textusa's disgraceful, disingenuous, deceit - a drawn out display of duplicitous deception, if ya like.
Textusa, you see IS a megalomaniac, an egotistical con-artist. One who expects the utmost respect, yet deserves none whatsoever.
So the reader can appreciate this fully, let's take a look back at what happens when it doesn't get the adoration they feel entitled to. Now try not to laugh:
Link to meltdown at textusa towers
What we can see above, is that textusa goes absolutely ape-shit if people don't read their blog, even going to the lengths of writing a piece solely dedicated to complaining about people NOT reading it, and threatening to leave a forum.
This, to quote the lunatic is "VERY interesting", and "I'll return to it later"...blah-blah, yadda-yadda.
It is of course, all well and good me claiming textusa's irrational behaviour toward me was down to one comment I made, but can I prove it?
"So, things are absolutely clear about what happened between myself and Ben Thompson (Pseudo Nym) today. Ben Thompson is a public name. Not revealing or outing anyone. He chose to let his name be known publicly, we have chosen anonymity.
He is admin of a FB group, Justice for Madeleine. That group, for some reason, since our Gemma O’Doherty’s posts, probably disagreeing with our opinion about Colin Sutton – to which they are entitled – have decided to react to our posts since then with insult."
It had nothing to do with your comments about Colin Sutton or Gemma O'Doherty. My comment was self explanatory. Here it is again:
"I’m not even going to bother. I’ve had a scan and the weekly obsession with Walker is a complete turn-off. Total waste of time, and exactly what they want. Disappointing”
"Not dissent but sheer insult. No valid argument about which one could agree, disagree, debate."
Sheer insult? You're talking utter nonsense.
"It’s their right to insult us, which is something we will not dispute."
It wasn't an insult.
"And it’s also the right of their admin to support those who insult us.
However, it’s also our right not to have to put up with that. Not a question of ego, simply of self-respect."
You lost any self respect eons ago, when you began a campaign swamped with lies and inventions.
"Just like I found to be unacceptable to remain in the CMOMM FB page for reasons we have expressed in a post, I decided to leave Justice. It’s been a while now."
...and yet they still obsess over the group, the admin, and the members. I see you also left HDH in a strop last week, simply because they shared a Blacksmith blog.
The Apology That Never Was
As the lies continued, it became necessary for others to contact textusa, which almost led to an admission that I was correct about their false accusations regarding the Meerkat account.
"Having been approached both publicly and privately, we have now come to the conclusion that we can’t be absolutely certain about the accusation we have made that the Meercat twitter is used also by Insane since his Walkercan1000 account has been taken away from him.
And as we never force the pieces of a puzzle to fit, we prefer to set aside for now this piece."
Oh but you do.
"Time will prove if it indeed fits and we have failed to give it that final twist or if it does not. If we find that only that last twist makes it fall into place, then we will return to it."
Twisting is what you do best.
"We have now corrected the Post Scriptum to this post accordingly.
The thought of Meerkat not being Insane leaves us particularly sad."
Oh good. Imagine how they felt being lied about by a con-artist.
"Sad, not because we may have been wrong (please note that with Anon we assume completely that we were wrong) but because while we hoped there was only one person with a sick and disrespectful sense of humour about Maddie McCann, there are 2: Insane AND Meerkat..."
...then further down the political style apology, get this:
"Many thanks to all who have expressed such support, and we can only promise that we will continue to move forward the best we can."
It is actually thanking their readers for supporting them, despite it conning those readers in the first place with their vile lies. Bazinga?
"Our last thanks goes to the wonderful readers who didn’t let themselves get distracted with this and kept the focus on the content of the post: that Smithman ambushed the Smiths."
...and now THANKING readers for not becoming distracted, when it should have been apologising for a distraction it caused, not only to the reader, but to the person who owns the Meerkat account. Someone textusa accused incorrectly, of being the disgusting Walker account.
What if someone accused of "kiddy fiddling", by the Walker account had taken textusa at their word? What if they had then been told who the Meerkat account belonged to.
What then?
Not only did textusa fail to fully correct their accusations, or apologise to the person it accused, it then set about inventing more defamatory lies, and guess who the target was - that's right, yours truly. Having failed to fully acknowledge it was wrong about the Meerkat account, even stating they "didn't care" if they were right or wrong, simply because I passed an opinion that wading through paragraph upon paragraph of Walker nonsense, was "a waste of time", textusa hatched its new plot.
Get this, it actually tried to insinuate I was working for Jim Gamble and Colin Sutton, that I was trying to incite a closure of Operation Grange (this despite me making a stand against any petitions calling for its closure), by supporting Mr Sutton's view that the McCanns should be brought in for questioning.
What evidence did it have for this? Well, I was a named researcher on Sonia Poulton's documentary - The McCanns and The Police Part 1:
Colin Sutton - someone textusa has taken great objection to - featured in the documentary. Mr Sutton stated, and he was right, that the McCanns should have been questioned upon commencement of Operation Grange. It's part of ACPO guidelines, that in cases such as these, the first people to be interviewed, should be the parents, and the last known persons to see Madeleine alive, which again, would be the parents. If the police haven't done that, and with Kate not answering those 48 questions - then something is seriously wrong.
Textusa also insinuated that Sonia had somehow obtained a "secret document", and also suggested I had knowledge of this. For the record, I have never seen any documents other than those freely available online. I have no idea what documents Sonia saw, or had access to. Unlike textusa, I'm not a nosy bastard, with a false sense of entitlement. Textusa could have asked Sonia directly, but as they decided to behave like Tony Bennett, choosing to cast aspersions simply to throw doubt over decent folk... if I were Sonia, I'd tell them to fuck off and mind their own business.
...but that folks, is all it takes. You see give textusa an apple, and almost overnight, it will have looked at the apple, decided the apple is red - red and yellow make orange - the apple (in textusa's mind), is no longer an apple, but an orange.
...and ohhhh how they stood in awe, and marvelled at the orange presented unto them.
Add a wall of text between each of those thought processes, some half arsed attempts at deep thought, a few riddles, and you have the formula to how textusa seeks to baffle and bedazzle with bullshit.
Before I leave the topic of Sonia's documentary. Just look at this typicalhypocritical arrogance:
"In her (Sonia's) favour, we have also said that we don’t mind the negligence promoted by Pat Brown. We know it didn’t happen..."
Then a few lines later:
"However, having dedicated herself to the case as she has, in the period of time she has and having the support she has said she has, one would expect that she would add the word ‘alleged’ whenever she mentioned negligence."
Have you ever seen such hypocrisy?
Let's not forget the PJ concluded that the children were left alone.
Goncalo Amaral also concludes that the children were left alone.
Does textusa make the same demands upon the PJ and Goncalo Amaral, simply because it claims to know the children weren't left alone?
Of course not, only Sonia. Why? Well, that's simple, because I was a named researcher, and I dared to say:
"I’m not even going to bother. I’ve had a scan and the weekly obsession with Walker is a complete turn-off. Total waste of time, and exactly what they want. Disappointing.”
...but my friends, we're only just beginning to see how textusa's warped mind operates, and how they'll invent any old codswallop to attack anyone who puts a dent in an ego so over-inflated, that if it were to burst, they'd propel around the room at warp factor 9, out of the window, before finally running out of foul air, landing somewhere in The Atlantic Ocean and causing untold damage to the eco-system - the protection of which, being something else textusa chose to attack, simply because of who was trying to raise awareness of it.
I'd like to point out that from the 7th April - the time textusa decided to wage a campaign of lies and defamation against myself, the group, and those I associate with, it made continual demands upon myself and others to answer questions it, felt somehow entitled to be told. These demands were laughable for two reasons:
1. textusa is a liar, a fraud, and a con-artist. As such they have no right to demand anything of anyone. They're merely a pathetic entity, with delusions of grandeur, and a nasty imagination.
2. textusa banned all those she made demands upon, from their facebook page with - considering how popular they claim to be - a surprisingly low figure of 247 followers. It also banned people from their personal wall, refused to join twitter (the platform they have stalked people on from the safety of their own blog, for months), and refused the offer of replying anywhere other than its blog, where it could, and does, manipulate replies.
Now the problem with replying to its blog, is this; if the answer isn't to textusa's liking, textusa won't publish it. That is of course their right, but perhaps not so much if they've demanded a response and a person has offered it. On other occasions, textusa will only publish part of a reply, again, because the rest wasn't to its liking.
Textusa was told this many times, yet carried on making demands. Not just of myself, but of many well known, respected 'antis'. It's of respect for those people, that I won't name them here. They are aware though.
Not only did textusa demand these responses, they had the audacity to state that if said anti didn't respond, then they were lying.
Now isn't
that about the most ridiculous thing you've ever read? If it is, then you've clearly never read the rest of textusa blog.
At the start of this seemingly ceaseless entry - again I apologise - I showed how textusa had, due to having no evidence whatsoever, tried to frame an anti of being responsible for the disgusting Walker account.
I also stated this wasn't the first time they had done so.
Some readers of textusa's blog will have heard of the Not Textusa blog, although most will be more familiar with the name textusa gave to the author - "Insane". To my knowledge and that of many others I've asked, nobody who has written about the McCann case, has ever gone by that name, but attach it to NT they did. They also accused the author of the Not Textusa blog, of being the vile pro McCann - 'Walker'. Why would they do that? As always, the answer is very simple. The author of the Not Textusa blog - who for the record myself and a few others, including John Blacksmith of the Blacksmith Bureau Blog -
http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/ - will tell you is NOT pro McCann, has NEVER been pro McCann, has NEVER posted as one, tweeted as one, or pretended to be one - is guilty of nothing more than being (if there is such a term) anti bullshit.
I myself, whilst being aware of the Not Textusa blogs, had never looked at them in any great detail. In fact until I began to see the full throttle deception of textusa, I was guilty of stupidly taking the king of the swingers' word at face value - that the blog was run by a pro. To that end, having read enough rubbish on actual pro forums to last a lifetime, I never looked any further - how I regret that now.
In stark contrast to the words of textusa, NT has been 'around' since the case broke, and social media platforms began discussing the case. Their grasp of the investigation, the files, the science, and any other area you care to mention, is far superior to the waffle and white noise that textusa promotes as truth. Yes, they present their blogs with some colourful language - textusa has that effect on most when you realise they're actively conning their readers - but that doesn't mean they're wrong. In fact, when you realise textusa is nothing short of a fraud, the way NT presents their blogs, is actually highly satisfying, and nothing less than textusa deserves.
For many years NT, has gone to great lengths to show the deceptive ways of textusa. If you haven't looked at the blog, please do. Please, read them with an open mind, cast aside any descriptions textusa has slapped upon the author, and read them.
Textusa will tell you that NT "disses" <cringe> the dogs" - they don't. What they do is to state facts, facts that Martin Grime himself is quoted as saying, facts that any anti who has fully researched and understood the work of the dogs will, and does agree with, from the first word to the last. Rather than accept that the NT was right, and because textusa had stupidly contradicted the words of Martin Grime, the only tactic available to them (remember being wrong is not an option) is to refuse to agree, choosing instead to waffle, to be verbose, to misquote, to misrepresent, and to accuse the NT of being a pro.
In order to smear and daub NT with the foulest matter they could muster, boxes needed to be ticked. The pro, textusa had to find, needed to be easily identifiable as a liar, they needed to be despised, they needed to be highly offensive, they needed to be well known to their readers, they needed to have as little credibility as possible, and they needed to be anonymous. With Rebecca Sherlock ruled out due to the last box not getting a tick, only one option remained, they needed to be "Walker"
Don't Mention The War
 |
| The bump to the head didn't go unnoticed at breakfast |
From one of the many posts textusa has written that discuss the tactics of war:
"A sniper will pin you down. You cannot advance anywhere. Your focus is totally directed to survival. The initiative is totally theirs. They control the moves and the rhythm.
In this situation, you have one of three choices: stay put, withdraw or eliminate the threat. The third option, easier said than done."
 |
| textusa couldn't help but wonder why the arrow on the wall, seemed to be pointing at its nose. |
The Not Textusa blog, has embarrassed textusa time and time again. The author has proved beyond any doubt that textusa has manipulates facts in order to give its theory weight. For textusa, this makes NT the enemy - the sniper. For a long time textusa tried the first option, to "stay put", to hold its position. When it became evident that tactic wasn't working, the second option was to "withdraw", something a megalomaniac couldn't even contemplate without their head imploding, then exploding, before emitting the sound of the sizzling short of an electrical malfunction. And so, the only option left, as textusa saw it, was to "eliminate the threat"
By denying, misrepresenting and refusing to understand the truths - no matter how blatantly obvious or easy to grasp, NT made them - textusa was already attempting to con its readers. The next step therefore, was an easy one to take. The moral line of right and wrong had already been crossed - with camp textusa set up in the latter. To admit such a litany of lies now, would be admitting defeat, and so, armed with the opportunity the vile Walker account offered, the framing of the author of the Not Textusa blog, began.
Cast sporadically into textusa's posts, were references to NT as being "Walker". The name "Insane" textusa chose for them, was also thrown into the mix with similar regularity, as if it were a name NT had gone by at some stage.
You only have to look (well I bloody well had to, so you can too) at the amount of times textusa used these names when describing NT, to see how desperately they were to indoctrinate them upon the readers minds, and more importantly, the images that go with them.
As I said earlier, I hadn't looked at the Not Textusa blog in any detail, but after seeing how they had previously tried to frame the Meerkat account, I decided to read - not only was I shocked to discover the author wasn't anything close to the image textusa had conjured up, I also found them extremely sharp, and witty. This case maybe no laughing matter, but that doesn't mean those discussing it have to wear black, speak in hushed voices, and leave humour in the car outside. Humour is a very powerful medium, more and more we find ourselves in a society where satire sells. It's a fact that any reader of any narrative, must be drawn in. Once they are drawn in, their attention must be kept.
I realise I'll have failed in that respect with this blog, but it's fucking hard to keep my own attention with this one - never mind yours. If you're one of those people who find that reading one textusa blog leaves you feeling like you've had your lobotomy with a rusty egg whisk, think how I feel writing about the bloody things.
Jeeves, more rum!
Better. Onward.
After reading a few, I read more, and after that, more again. I was considering posting the Not Textusa blog onto the group. I knew it would be a risk with textusa overheating, but I also felt that the blog would be an excellent resource for those following the case - which it is.
Well. I posted it. And. Well. The shit hit the fan.
Textusa called an emergency meeting at HQ. In their tiny mind, the enemy had signed up new recruits.
I'm not kidding, textusa refers to anyone who promotes the blog, or who comments there, as part of a gang. Not just any gang, noooo, a "lick-spittle gang"
Did I mention they were off their head?
No?
Ok, they're off their head.
The anti - so to speak - needed to be upped. Textusa had already sunk into the depths of lunacy, but then the plot began to thicken.
In textusa's psychedelically compromised mind, they saw not one, but several snipers, all of whom generally agreed with the words of NT. Of equal concern though, was that more of us knew textusa was lying about NT being Walker, and why. So, a response was needed. Again, with the first two options impossible, the third option was attempted - eliminate the threat.
Textusa began stalking our every tweet, cherry picking them and transferring them to the blog. True to form, they misrepresented them, they took them out of context, and they used them to cast doubts upon all of us. They also set about denigrating our facebook group, calling into question the authenticity of the membership numbers. Numbers matter to textusa you see, they matter so much that they'll write posts about them if they don't get enough of them clicking on their comment section formerly known as a blog.
I've never bragged about the number of members the group has. In fact when I created it in 2014, I never wanted a large group. As anyone who was close to me at the time will tell you, I wanted a small group that was easy to run, and had a slightly different style of posting to others. Anyway, small was how it stayed for a while. Then, as the group grew a little, we began to build an admin team. The admin all enjoyed writing posts, and would be producing two or three each day. Then, in June 2014, the news broke that cadaver dogs were being taken to Praia da Luz to search wasteland. Not since Crimewatch 2013, had interest in the case been so high. It wasn't long after that announcement, that one of the admin wrote an alternative version of 48 questions they wanted to ask Kate McCann. Certainly in terms of the McCann case, it went viral. Within days it had tens of thousands of shares, it was cropping up all over, and at the bottom of the post, a link to the group - something we used to do with all posts. The result of that and other posts that were also being shared widely, was that the numbers grew at a rate of knots. It was actually a nightmare, the group was stupidly busy. So busy in fact that we had to assign one admin to watch one post each - it was impossible to keep up.
But, textusa, don't take my word for it, go check the numbers yourself. Count them one by one, if you like. You'll find no irregularities whatsoever. You see you can buy followers for a facebook page - shut ya wallet sailor - such as OFM for example, but for a group, it's not something you can do. Textusa, having been a member themself for four years, only chose to question the numbers, AFTER we started promoting the Not Textusa blog. That in itself, should speak volumes, and it does.
Attempting to call the membership number into disrepute, stalking us, and re-producing our tweets was just a small part of textusa's attempt to "eliminate" us. The main plan was yet to unfold.
More Framing
Textusa, driven by its absolute need to be considered a legend in their own lifetime (I know, I KNOW, but it's bloody well true!), concocted perhaps the most ridiculous fairy-tale I've ever seen since Bennett tried to pass as a model for Loreal - for the record, he's not worth it.
Whilst watching our tweets, textusa noticed us debating the case with a pro called Nick Townsend. Nick Townsend is a dyed in the wool pro McCann. He has used -amongst others - the names HonestBroker and Ferryman, but to explain who Nick Townsend is a little better than me, and because I can't be arsed, I'd like to (and hope he doesn't mind), use the words of John Blacksmith:
"There is no mystery at all about Honestbroker, just as there is no mystery at all about swinging cover-ups: both are symptoms of Textusa's inability to see anything straight, a matter of no significance to us but of some import to people who've believed in her fantasies, people who have now been left stranded, aghast at what she's been saying.
Honestbroker was a founder and chief researcher for the "exposing the myths" site and a doughty, and at times very powerful, critic of the more numbskulled antis until struck by an illness which devastated his ability to analyse and forced him to give up serious research.
His identity was revealed by a number of "anti" researchers years ago, people angered not so much by the force of his criticisms but by a malign streak of viciousness which worsened as his neurological ability to criticise coherently waned. Along with his name they revealed his location, family details and the nature of his illness. I will say no more than that.
I, alongside others known to us here, debated with him many times over the years as did the Green Leaper - Hi Frog, wie geht's? - and others known to us, but as his faculties diminished so did any point in bothering. The viciousness, which had seen him disparagingly discuss the well-known murder of my oldest friend on McCann forums, remained, together with the obduracy.
His intellectual and moral disintegration featured greatly on the now-deleted Amazon forum where his posts were greeted by a pervading sense of embarrassment and discomfort. The same process can still be observed on STM, his long-term McCann/internet base. Almost uniquely for that wasps' nest, his contributions over recent years have been moderated and publicly corrected, while being largely ignored by other members. Latterly he has posted under his own name in certain places.
There's no mystery at all in this sad and unpleasant story of a life in terminal decline except, possibly, the exact root of his obsession with Grime."
Now you have a basic idea of who I'm talking about, let's look at why I needed to tell you:
Whilst out on its morning stalk, textusa found themselves another 'opportunity' to "eliminate" the enemy. You see, despite not being on twitter, and being too afraid to join due to a lack of control over what is said (they hate that), textusa has been making note of every single tweet myself, some of the admin, and anyone they think is linked to me, in the hope they can find something to twist to what they THINK is their advantage. Anyway, whilst textusa was stalking in wonderland, it spotted me disagreeing with Nick Townsend, it also saw two other admin of the group doing so. Nothing untoward in us doing that, as Mr Blacksmith pointed out, Nick Townsend has made it his mission to libel Martin Grime. For those of you who follow this blog, you'll know that myself, and those who have contributed in the past, fully support Martin Grime, and the abilities of Eddie and Keela. So when I see a pro libeling him, and lying about the dogs, I will tackle them. No mystery, no conspiracy...but, look what textusa made of the encounter.
Warning, you may want to move to the floor. It's the best place to roll when laughing, I'm told.
I'll adopt the style of Not Textusa here, and interject as Bruce Swingstein takes us by the hand, and leads us up the garden path. It's the only way to go with the written equivalent of a mudslide. Hold on to your hats, this might get messy:
"We have taken some time to respond to Blacksmith. We preferred to let his words speak for themselves. Allow the readers to absorb them because it does take time to absorb them properly"
This has to be irony. Textusa can barely string a coherent sentence together!
"His rudeness towards us – saying our readers are aghast as if he knew our readers, but then Blacksmith is Blacksmith and Blacksmith knows all – is unsurprising and quite boring."
Classic case of psychological projection.
"As boring as has been all the abuse we have received for years."
...but it's perfectly ok for you to frame antis as pros, lie and misrepresent anyone you see as a threat?
"Unsurprising because it’s expected. When one rips the mask off a fraud, one obviously doesn’t expect him to take it lying down."
Textusa has gone off on a tangent here, reminiscing of the night they spent with a gimp who promised them the earth.
"Says Blacksmith: “The viciousness, which had seen him disparagingly discuss the well-known murder of my oldest friend on McCann forums”
What follows couldn't be any more deplorable. As you've seen, John Blacksmith mentioned the murder of his close friend. Not knowing when to draw a line, and lacking in any form of moral fibre, textusa wades in with despicable ease.
"What murder is Blacksmith referring to that Honestbroker was discussing?"
Absolutely none of your fucking business, you obscene creep.
"The only well-known death within the Maddie case was that of Brenda Leyland. Is Blacksmith suggesting that Brenda was murdered? Based on what? As far as we know, the British authorities, in which Blacksmith so much trusts, have ruled Brenda’s death as suicide."
Yet again, textusa displays a total inability to grasp anything bar handfuls of pampas grass, as they lurk outside a house Freda had disappeared into with an accomadating couple, and some chap from tinder with an egg plant in his pocket. Ayeee!
"We at the blog believe that Brenda took her own life, however, the circumstances that we believe pushed her to make her decide to take her own life are indeed near-bordering on murder."
Your false outings could well cause another death.
"Is Blacksmith recognising this fact? If he is, and if he knows as we believe he does, what exactly those circumstances were, out of respect for the woman he should refrain from ever saying her name."
Out of respect for the human race, you should crawl into a cave in the woods, and never be allowed Wi-Fi again. You really are repugnant.
"One clue, it’s no secret that in those circumstances was the infamous CEOP report. Which apparently has resurfaced again this year by the hand of Sonia Poulton."
Apparently? You mean according to you. You truly are an evil piece of shit.
"Says Blacksmith: “Honestbroker was a founder and chief researcher for the "exposing the myths" site and a doughty, and at times very powerful, critic of the more numbskulled antis”.
If we didn’t know this individual whose mask is falling off we would be somewhat shocked by his seeming acceptance of some of the sites many of us regard as operated by pros, as the one he refers to:"
It
is operated by pros. What in God's name are you trying to smear people with now?
"This forum defends the consistency of the T9 statements and rogatories. Certainly not what Sr Amaral or the PJ thought."
You should see if you can join - ask Tony Bennett to hold your hand. Neither of you support the theories of Goncalo Amaral or the PJ - you'd be right at home.
"Blacksmith defending someone who defends such consistencies says it all. And by calling those who oppose them as “numbskulled antis”, Blacksmith is facilitating our lives in proving that he’s as big – if not bigger – a fraud passing as an anti as NT is."
Blacksmith hasn't defended Townsend/HonestBroker/Ferryman. He's told you who they are. You demanded to be told - but had hoped you wouldn't be. Stop spouting nonsense.
"We’re personally aghast that Blacksmith has the shamelessness to give such a sympathetic account of Honestbroker, who posted on the vile Chaosraptors site- the home of Nigel Nessling, Upshon and co."
You mean Nick Townsend, the person you tried to say Not Texusa invented?
"Blacksmith certainly seems to have some admiration for Honestbroker in the earlier days as it seems that accordingly before he fell ill he did serious research: “until struck by an illness which devastated his ability to analyse and forced him to give up serious research”.
Blacksmith is very clear that Honestbroker is seriously ill. Besides what he says above he adds “which worsened as his neurological ability to criticise coherently waned”, speaks of “his intellectual and moral disintegration” and says it’s just a “sad and unpleasant story of a life in terminal decline”.
If Honestbroker is Nick Townsend, as say NT, Mr Thompson and the Frog (hope the reader noted how he tried to validate the Frog’s opinion that Nick Townsend is Honestbroker), he seems to be functioning well, if unacceptably."
Functioning well? Have you actually seen the shit he writes. If you spent less time looking for things that aren't there, and more time concentrating on reality...well, you'd be half-way to being a half decent person. As it is, you're possibly the most clinically insane person I've ever come across on the internet.
In fact, textusa, could it be that Walker was your invention, someone you needed to create in order to smear Not Textusa?
Well, is that possible?
For someone to dream up the pigswill and piss you do, it must be something you have experience of personally. Are you Walker, Textusa? You promote the account every single day, and have done for weeks. Just what is your agenda?
Textusa then goes on to provide a link to Nick Townsend's tweets, and encourages its readers to judge whether Townsend is mentally ill - because they're all qualified to do so. Fucking freak.
If you want to read the rest, you're welcome. I can't stand to put my eyes through the trauma. I will however, end this particular chapter with this little quote from the horrendous creep himself.
"Why are we turning on people? Mt Thomson was the first to do this, not us, with his followers behind him. And he’s turned on many other people in the past."
...and we're back to the comment that, by textusa's own admission, was the whole reason they have embarked upon 5 month campaign of filthy lies against myself - much longer for NT.
Now ask yourself this.
If textusa was willing to frame myself, some of the members of the admin team, call the group into disrepute, stalk my every online move, and write wave after wave of utter claptrap, simply because I interrupted a plot they were knee deep in the middle of, then just think about why it framed the author of the Not Textusa blog, as being Walker.
Oh...one more thing.
When you're busy cackling over your cauldron, accusing others of "hatemongering", you might want to check your own posts.
In this one you attack and body shame an actress, simply because she played the role of Kate McCann:
Link to textusa hate fest
I trust you washed your mouth out.
I think that just about wraps things up, certainly for the main part of the blog. I'm sure myself and others will think of much, much more to add to the comments below. A little time saving tip though, if you're a desperate attention seeker, your comments will be sent straight to the spam box.
Textusa, I will give you the right to reply here, should you wish to swing by. That offer is only valid for one week, after which, if you haven't admitted your dishonesty and apologised to every single person you've lied about, you can rot in your own pit.
You truly disgust me.
