Message By VEE8 On Raptors

Early this morning there was a post answering a previous one from Mrs Trellis. Though it was listed as anonymous, I suspect it was from bennett, even though the post refers to him in the third person. After I copied it out, and wrote a rebuttal to most of it, the damn post then disapeared! I don't want to waste that effort however, so, if I may, I'll post it here. It is very long, so I'll do it in sections.

Mrs Trellis honey,
I see your 'charming' manner is on display again .
Equally can I say your rude tirade against TB and co-workers constitute harassment of them and by that you’re insulting Madeleine, because people like you want the campaigners to stop searching for the ‘truth’ for her. Do you know the truth, absolute truth, and nothing but the truth, better than any one of us? If you don't, why is it against your principles for others to seek the truth.

So, now Bennett considers himself a campaigner for the truth, does he? No, it is not against our principles to seek the truth, but, and I will repeat this comment at the end, you cannot seek the truth via a campaign of lies.

Both versions of story are not circulated in equal measures, with the process files heavily suppressed by McCann’s from reaching UK public. Do you have any idea what they fear - any suggestions? 

Firstly, you cannot give equal weight to two unequally valid arguments. There are those who believe the moon landings were faked, and even have what they see as evidence. But you rarely read it in the papers, and when you do it is to debunk the fakers claims. Is that what you want, to have your faked abduction claims publicly debunked, and you to be publicly humiliated? Happy to oblige. Secondly, the files are readily available. How else do you think we manage rip apart bennett’s shocking lack of research, if we cannot read the files ourselves?

Bearing in mind Maddie’s the one deprived of a voice, voices questioning the truth can only be to her advantage – do you not think so?

Not if it leads to her never being found, or her abductors evading justice.

Insult is when she’s marketed as a product by her parents, exploited for money, only to be wasted on PIs purported to search for her, but despite different sets of PIs, all to no avail.

HIGHLY disingenuous. How are the parents supposed to keep her profile high then? They have made not a penny piece for their own pockets out of this, despite all the smear and spin by the anti’s. As for waste, it will not have been wasted if they find her, will it?

If speculations are true, they didn’t even follow up leads!

Ah, but the speculations are NOT true, are they!

On top of that there’s the farcical first of M3 then Halligen; coincidentally duped twice? Given that, can people be blamed for doubting? 

Yes, they can be blamed for doubting, and not sympathising with a grieving family who have been cruelly and shamelessly ripped off.

Don’t forget part of the money for the PIs came from members of the public. Public have a right to know.

The story of Halligen has been in the press already, the public already know.

Insult to Maddie is when McCann’s blind cult followers cannot be objective. For them it isn’t about ‘truth for Maddie’. 

Now who’s being insulting? Your idea of being objective is to follow bennett blindly, to the exclusion of anything else. Toe the party line or be banned from any forum he is a member of. No discussions allowed, he IS right, we ARE wrong. Call that objective? Because I don’t.

Their insistent Maddie is alive and can be found despite evidence showing to the contrary is burying their head in sand - is that objective?

Evidence? What evidence? Has her body been found then?

Well, abduction disbelievers too hoped that she can be found and found alive, but the reality is not in the evidence, and seeking the truth is objective, would you say so? 

Seeking ONE path of truth, to the exclusion of all others is what got amaral in the world of hurt he is in right now.

What is so shameful about seeking the truth. Contrarily, insult to her is when people like you denied her a voice, all in the name of protecting her parents - is denying her a voice something proud for you and your ilk’s to do? Well it seems to come across that way!

We are not Madeleine’s voice, but NEITHER ARE YOU. As for protecting her parents, we are simply here to expose the lies put about by the likes of amaral and bennett, so the wider public, should they ever read any of this, will not be taken in. If that’s seen as ‘Protecting’ them, then so be it. As for pride, yes, I AM proud to be a ‘McCann believer.’

Truth for Maddie propels the campaigners work? While it’s clear as lightning hatred born out of fear of the truth being exposed propels those who hurled abuse and tirade at campaigners.

I can’t speak for others, but my only fear is of Madeleine being left to her fate because of the lies of bennett and others.

It’s not about her parents. They have a voice, and proved they’re well capable of using it well to defend themselves, as evidenced by their legal suits against all and sundry who dares to question their version. 

All and sundry? As far as I’m aware there has only been TWO people threatened with legal action, that’s bennett and amaral, both with very good reason. More importantly, when the search for their daughter is at risk they will fight like Lions to protect that search in any way possible. If you don’t like being challenged in court, then don’t tell lies that can damage their search chances, simple as that.


To be fair, I don’t think anyone (pro or anti abduction theorists alike) gives her up for dead as a given fact. The stark facts are in the process files - plenty circumstantial evidence supporting she died in the apt, and none of intruder or abduction, cannot be ignored as figments of law enforcers imagination.

No my friend, there is NO circumstantial evidence of death in the apartment, as you well know by now. There is, however, at least two sets of DNA that, to this day, have still not been identified. How can we be sure one is not the abductor? We have witnesses who saw a man hanging around outside the apartment for several occasions before, and witness statements of a man seen carrying something looking like a child after the time of the abduction. THAT would lead any sensible person to assume abduction.


The case investigation under concealment of cadaver and simulation of abduction was supported by PT and UK police as well as Portugal Public Ministry as documented in amaral’s book based on process files. 

Now we are descending into comedy here, as it has been clearly shown that amaral’s book is as far from the files as chalk is from cheese. His book is totally discredited as any form of reliable source, so don’t even bother.

In closing statement, the AG said she is most likely dead.

He also said there is NO evidence of a crime committed by the McCanns, or did you conveniently miss that bit?

Who's insisting she’s dead and all the rest ………..according to you? The police isn’t it? Can you blame them? 

Not the British police, unless you can show it.

Are you suggesting people should continue to support the charade search?
Where are people supposed to look?
Zimbawe? Pulau Ubin? Bintan? Phi Phi Ilsand, middle-east? Where?
What are people supposed to look out for?
Victoria Beckham lookalike, or egg man, or George Harrison lookalike, gypsy, what exactly? 

Sick, sick, sick. Are YOU suggesting no one should ever look for her ever again?

What had their private dicks been doing for 3-1/2 years? 

LOOKING FOR MADELEINE. Something amaral conspicuously failed to do.

In your view, who is hindering the search? 

Anyone who insists on lying about the parental involvement, leading to misleading the public that she is dead, and therefore not worth looking for. In your case, if the cap fits…

Do you honestly think two countries police forces rich in experience conjure it out of thin air?

Given amaral’s past track record, yes.

What about the dogs? Ah. the dogs....!
You do realise the McCann’s didn’t dispute the dogs markings or do you not?

You do, of course, have proof of this?

They were too busy bashing the dogs reliability and used expensive lawyers to obtain files from America on Zapata's case because an incompetent judge throw out dog evidence in Sept 2007.

And who, exactly, declared this judge incompetent, and why? Was it bennett himself, because the judge didn’t follow the party line that ‘dogs don’t lie? It is a matter of fact that sniffer dog indications are not allowed as evidence in any court, here and America, without forensic backup. The rest of the Zapata case is not relevant here.

If you don’t care about truth for Maddie, well there are people who do want to know whether police’s version is correct, or McCann’s version has a leg to stand on.

The PJ version has already been shown to be grossly incompetent and deeply flawed, so that does tend to lessen the available choices.

How does posing questions tantamount to hampering the search?

Posing your own, factually incorrect answers to your own questions does just that.

Isn’t that the job of PIs and Police (if they are still searching, but from all accounts they have stopped, believing she’s dead)?

Which accounts?

In case you’re not aware, they (by they I take it you mean TB and his co-activists) are the very ones pushing for further investigation by way of an inquiry ‘into the reality’ as you put it. Not the parents. The parents could have asked for the process to remain open, which was their legal right, but didn’t do so. Do you have any idea what they fear? 

The parents HAVE asked for the case to be reopened, several times, even travelling to Portugal on at least one occasion to do so. Also, what do you think they have just asked the Home Secretary to do?

3) By associating Madeleine with their mess of foul and increasingly bizarre conspiracy theories they are also insulting her. The vast majority of the people promoting this agenda are either mentally ill or deeply damaged, sometimes both. The case needs sound and sober minds, not mad people.

Are you implying the investigators and PIs are not sound and sober minds people? Well they were the people on the case in you overlooked.
What did they come up with? Well, we know what the police came up with.
What did the PIs came up with – few photo-fits, not much else really. 

Twisting the statement. The poster was saying that the PI’s WERE the sound and sober minds.

If labelling the anti-abduction theorists is the pros’ idea of sanity of mind it's a no wonder mccanns are still doing their rounds of charade.
Wouldn’t you say that the best way forward is for the McCann’s to push for an investigation or inquiry, since it is claimed that the police are no longer looking for her. More so, they should push for an open investigation if they really want to find her. Selling tacky products and putting out begging bowl three half year down the line does not bode well or look good for them - or don’t you think so?

No, I don’t think so, and nor does the majority of the public. The search cannot be run on nothing more than good wishes and thin air. And as already stated, the McCanns ARE pushing for the case to be reopened.

In fact, ironically, they’d publicly approached amateurish students via internet to help them look out, yet showed no sign of wanting officials to continue searching. 

They want EVERYONE to help, as much as possible. And where have they ever implied they no longer want official help? Nowhere.

They could have lobbied the police to continue searching

I imagine that was why they asked for Scotland Yards help.

or even ask the police why they stopped searching – but they didn’t. Instead, they wouldn’t hesitate to use (dodgy) PIs 

The current PI’s have an exemplary employment history. As for Halligen, well he was a con man.

If meek and blind acceptance of McCann’s and friends full of inconsistencies, holes, and spin amounts as complete truth for you that’s your prerogative. You are v. entitled to keep yours and let others keep theirs, thank you. 

Inconsistencies which, as ANY policeman of repute will tell you, form part of ANY investigation. Factor in the language difficulties, with statements translated from English to Portuguese and back again, sometimes several times, and inconsistencies are not just usual, they are inevitable.

You referred to it as TB's agenda? May I ask: what agenda?
Who stands to gain from having agenda?

FAME. TB has always craved it.


Campaigners? All they ever get relentlessly is tirade and abuse from certain quarters– and did that deter them? 

Well that certainly cuts both ways. The difference is WE don’t resort to smears, lies and distortions to get our side across.

You think it’s fun work to work under that hostile climate to get to the ‘truth’? And you said TB had an agenda? Wake up and get real.

Ditto.

So let’s get realistic, who stands to gain from agenda? Well the answer is so obvious even the blind can see it - logic dictates people who want to get away from prosecution for the crime have the most to gain from having agenda - am I not right?

For once, yes. The abductor/s and ALL those covering for them.

5) Bennett has set himself up repeatedly as TruthSeeker general in other cases, the vast majority of which end up with his erstwhile mates distancing themselves from him. Bennett's principal agenda is simply Bennett. This time he has gone way too far, and I would like to see him stopped before he causes any more grief to any more families.

Well that's obviously solely your prejudiced opinion for reasons known to you, you are entitled to it. Supporters of the campaign work are entitled to theirs.
I hate to say this, but it seems you've noticed TB's forte i.e. willingness to help real victims; and to take on complicated cases for very little returns that do not parallel his time spent. That in itself requires a special kind of persona - a good hearted person giving of his time and efforts with a huge sense of what’s wrong and what’s right, righteousness if you will, who believes in justice for REAL victims ether let down or forsaken by law. 

bennett has a reputation for doing nothing more than jump on high profile bandwagons that gain him some measure of limelight, nothing more. Why did he get involved in the Barrymore case? Because that story was flavour of the month with the press at that time. You claim he seeks justice for victims, yet he persistently ignores undisputable evidence of amaral’s corruption. Perhaps you should ask him why?

And you said : you wanted to see that stop?
How do you propose to do that? By hurling more insult, tirade, smear, slurs, slanders............?
Why now? Why not before, as you pointed out correctly you knew he represented others cases before, and Madeleine's not his first?
What has changed for you now that you suddenly want to stop his type of work? Is this personal for you? What is it then? Is this your personal crusade or toeing your party's line? 

Because his is not a campaign of seeking truth nor justice, it is a campaign of lies and smears, for the sole purpose of self-aggrandisement.

I notice your attack of TB is very personal. From a bystander objective viewpoint, TB has made a valid observation that you and others were rude and abusive to him and his co-campaigners. If that is your way of stopping the activists work, heaven forbids! 

So Bennett has suffered abuse and threats? Poor little mite! What about the poor mother of a disabled child, hounded from her job when bennett’s fellow anti’s discovered her real name? Do you approve of that? I myself have had threats of violence against me, threats that my car would be vandalised, my family, and in particular my kids have been called inbreeds and I have been called a homosexual. Worst of all, one of bennett’s fellow posters, the ever delightful drachensachen/schnuffel, publicly accused me of hounding an innocent man until he committed suicide. THAT one was particularly painful, as the ‘innocent man’ in question was a paedophile who, unknown to myself or my wife, had been systematically sexually abusing my eldest daughter since she was eleven years old. Insults are, unfortunately, a two way street, so don’t play bennett as the poor wounded victim, the suffering martyr, because he is a long way from being the only one.

What about doing something constructive?
Like come up with reasons to support the abduction theory to render it credible or lobby the police or authority to open the case and most importantly lobby them to continue searching for Maddie, or better still lobby the rich and famous to trot half the world into deserted, lawless, and God forsaken areas to look because Maddie's supposed to be hidden in those areas isnt it according to the mccanns? 

Many of us are doing precisely that, but quietly, behind the scenes, without blowing our own trumpets in an effort to say, ‘Look at me, what a good boy am I.’

is that enough for you or do you still not get the point?

No, sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t get your points because they were prejudice and banal to me.
Equally is that enough points for you why activists despite facing adversity -- threat of legal suit, tirade and smear by McCann’s supporters -- continue their courageous work?
Shall I recap it for you? It is about Madeleine – voice for her!

Courageous? You MUST be joking! Courage would have been to stand by your claims, to face the McCann’s in that libel case, not turn tail and run back to mothers at the first sign of trouble. And Madeleine, God willing, still has her voice, and in her absence the only people with the right to speak on her behalf are her parents, not us, and especially not you.

Believers and disbelievers are entitled to their views.
Personally, I don’t believe the McCann’s or their friends for one second, and God's willing the Truth will out. 

Ignore the facts if you wish, but don’t distort them and don’t fabricate them, and don’t, ever, claim to speak for the majority of the public, because you don’t.

Equally, I feel those who don’t do the work or cannot do the work should let others get on with the work and stop interfering if the society is to stand a chance of retaining good and right moral values for future generations.

And there is where WE have the moral high ground.


As I said at the beginning, NO ONE has the right to claim to be a campaigner for the truth, and then turn round and lie, and lie and lie again, with smears, distortions, wild insinuations and groundless speculation.




TAKEN FROM CHAOSRAPTORS SITE