When the Tapas group dined each evening, they were short of a number of things
Common sense is one
Any sense of responsibility for their children is another
But what they were not short of was witnesses.
Fellow diners were eating at other tables
A dozen or so staff prepared their food, waited on their tables, mixed drinks
Other holidaymakers called in to pick up takeaway orders
They sometimes stopped and chatted with diners while they were waiting
None of these were people with any previous connection to the McCanns, they were just other bods with a reason to be there
Now bear all that in mind when you read the following in Textusa's own words:
''To our new readers, we have created the acronym BRT and it stands for Big Round Table.
Not just any BRT but the one and only that, allegedly, the T9 sat around to have dinner from Sunday 29Apr07 to the fateful Thursday 03May07.
The BRT at Tapas Bar esplanade where , allegedly, 9 adults dined 5 evenings in a row''
''That’s the BRT we refer to when we say BRT in a nutshell. The BRT. Yes, we get it. Big Round table. Get on with it.....
The BRT we say never existed.''
Oh fuck. Nurse, she's out of bed again.......Yes ladies and gentlemen., you did read that right. Textusa has declared the table extinct. It has ceased to be. It is an ex-table.
Oh noes - whatever does this mean? Well let's ask her, shall we?
'' The inexistence of the BRT meant there were no Tapas dinners, so the Tapas Reservation Sheets could only be fake and these posts proved that they were easily proven false by themselves''So let me see if I have got this right. The McCann group never ate at the tapas, and all the other diners who claimed they ate there too, they were also lying, as were Mark Warner and all their staff? Surely not...........
''The fascinating thing was that although we proved beyond any reasonable doubt that there were no Tapas T9 dinners, our voice has been very lonesome.Oh - well apparently that is exactly what she is saying, and what is more she criticises the rest of the McCann sceptical community, saying that you will do almost anything to avoid this being discussed. How incredibly rude and patronising.
The BRT has been an “off-bounds” issue in other sites, together with the swinging thesis and the fact there was no T9 negligence whatsoever.''
''The reason is very simple, not having a BRT means that Ocean Club and guests have openly lied in this case and that is something “White Hats” (“WH”) will do almost anything to avoid being openly discussed.
So no one talked about it and everyone pretended not to have read us. And we wrote a lot about as can be seen.''
Not that people haven't tried to rescue her from her own idiocy. They have. Many times. Here is what happens to them:
''On August 23, 2011, our reader, Guerra, placed in a comment to our post “Tapas Quiz Question #5” post (15Aug2011) a link to a video in which Sky News' Martin Brunt appears, according to his own words, sitting at the BRT.''Well that was good of them. What became of it?
Oh dear, I can see where this is going
''Mind you, we only get a partial view of it. Allegedly, that is.''
''This led, more than a year later, to our “Bluntly Bruntling Things Up” post (20Sept2012) where we showed that the images of the video had been manipulated.''
No you didn't, Textusa. You CLAIMED it had been manipulated, and some of your sycophants fell in behind you and agreed. But you demonstrated nothing, you proved nothing. All you did was made yourself look a bit more foolish
You know, Textusa, this started with a post where you said ''no way did they have a table that big'' which gave rise to your claim that they never ate there. But you hadn't thought it through. Time and again people told you ''But Textusa, there are many witnesses who can account for their presence'' but your response was always the same - they must be lying.
Not once did you stop and think about it. You were too arrogant to say ''Actually, that's a good point - forget what I said'' which you could have done at any time. But no. You persisted. You built on it. And you banned anyone who dissented so that you didn't have to deal with the knowledge that you got it wrong.
I will be returning to this theme again, at which point I will demonstrate that, like a child telling a single lie that it has to tell another ten to cover up for, Textusa's dogmatic and foolish insistence on clinging to this fallacy about the ''table that never was'' shapes her ongoing delusions
Tomorrow we will look at her horror when the table that never existed turned up in a documentary by Mr Amaral and how she tried to wriggle out of that one!