Evening all. As you will probably remember, Textusa's entire theory hinges on the barking mad idea that there was no round table at the tapas big enough to accommodate a party of nine, and therefore the tapas dinners never happened.
Right now you are probably sitting there saying to yourself "But that is nuts!" and you would of course be quite right. It is completely nuts. But that isn't where it ended. Because it soon emerged that Sky News had filmed reporter Martin Brunt sitting at ''The table that never was''.............
"An opulent hall in the palace.
Guests arrive at the palace for a costume ball. Siegfried's mother commands him to dance with six princesses and choose one as a bride. Siegfried complains that he does not love any of them. Von Rothbart arrives in disguise with his daughter Odile. He has transformed Odile so that she appears identical to Odette in all respects except that she wears black rather than white. The prince mistakes her for Odette and dances with her. Odette appears as a vision and vainly tries to warn Siegfried that he is being deceived. But Siegfried remains oblivious and proclaims to the court that he intends to makeOdile his wife. Von Rothbart shows Siegfried a magical vision of Odette and he realises his mistake. Grief-stricken, Siegfried hurries back to the lake."
By now you are probably thinking "What is the mad old fool on about now?"
All I can say is, it gets even better.....
I can't even fucking remember what the Shadow Trick was. If you are that desperate to know, and you are killing time waiting for a new kidney or something, I suggest searching her posts. But it might be worth leaving a will first, just in case.
Or, in English, Textusa made a load of bullshit claims about how no big round table existed. Then someone found the footage of Brunty sitting at one. Textusa threw the blog into full reverse, like a man in a canoe who has just spotted a sign saying ''Beware - waterfall" with lots of bunches of petrol station flowers tied to it.
Or, again in English, today we are going to have another go at bullshitting our way out of this massive turd we landed in last time.
Today we intend to show it like it is, to your and our full satisfaction.
The investigation we did for this post, I must confess, was one of the most satisfactory to do because our assumptions made us begin to go down a certain path but our findings made us correct our steps.
Okay - what she is saying here is, faced with the clear evidence in the form of filmed footage of the table the Tapasniks occupied, she 'helpfully' explained to her deranged followers that Sky News had faked the footage years earlier in the sure and certain knowledge that sooner or later a prematurely senile, clinically insane dingbat would eventually figure out that there was no such table. Because they are in on it too, you see? Sky News. Oh yes, they gladly gave up the scoop to end all scoops in order to save the neck of a hairy-arsed, foul-mouthed doctor. And her husband.
We began at a stage that we’d figured out that the “shadow trick” together with the “chair stance” onewere done with the purpose of creating the illusion that a round table was bigger than it really was and that it was of a different shape, oval, than it really also was.
Why not? Oh yes, that's right - a table that size would be so vast it would generate it's own gravitational field and interfere with the Space/Time continuum. Sorry, I forgot. Do go on.......
The problem is that we had a round table apparently bigger than those from the Tapas Bar as pictured byMr. Amaral.
It was a bigger than these but obviously not big enough to sit 9 people, nor 10 if you're to includeNajoua, the Quiz Mistress.
See? In on it......
Mr Brunt and his crew made sure that we got that clear.
He is sitting down, talking into the camera, you dozy mare. What possible reason would they have to start dicking about with it? And what the fuck reason would they have for determining the ''adequateness of the esplanade"?
He doesn’t show the whole table for a reason. He is already sitting at the table and isn’t shown getting up. The camera also doesn’t pan around the room not allowing us to see the table among the rest of the furniture so we could've been able to compare it with others, nor can we make our own judgment about the size and adequateness of the esplanade.
It is insanely easy to find.
As we’ve said many times, a round table for 9 is not an easy object to find.
Why???!!!!!! Do you think they kept it ready just in case a roaming troupe of nine people just happened to drop in?If Mr Brunt had found such a table, we would have surely seen it in all it’s glory and size and most likely fully garnished with placemats, cutlery, plates and even napkins to make the set complete.
And what is this obsession with Placemats???
And ''even napkins" she ponders, as if this is the height of sophistication. I can only assume she just grabs a bite at the truck stop......
And I'm sure he feels really bad about it.But no, Mr.Brunt never gets to show us the whole table, that place where the T9 last had peac
Yes, every time they need a large table the obvious thing to do is to roll one down the hill from the other restaurant half a mile away.
So we thought that it could be a table brought in from The Mill, Ocean Club’s real restaurant, or then from some private house in PdL.
And isn't it a nuisance when restaurants pop round your house and ask to borrow your furniture? The cheeky bastards from my local Italian restaurant popped round and borrowed 2 dining chairs, a bedside cabinet and a towel rail last week - if this goes on, we'll be eating off the floor.
So one table is darker than another and you immediately suspect they robbed it from a neighbour?
Although the table is shiny and highly reflective it’s seems to be darker than the ones from Mr Amarals’pictures and this seemed to confirm our suspicions that it was table brought from outside on purpose.
Why? Who the fuck thinks like that?
It's not a 'fact', you utter cockwomble; it's a delusion.
We then started to seek evidence to prove this fact.
What were they eating, that the table wouldn't hold it's weight?We started by checking that the square tables were of similar dimensions as the round tables.
Textusa gazed warily at the fragile tables. "There is no way they will hold a whopper of these dimensions" she said to herself
Both are a fold-away type, with X-format legs, typical of this kind of outside furniture. Fragile by nature not meant to be used with frequency to hold the weight of the various objects, food and liquids that are usually involved in a full course meal for 9 people.
A whole cow?
A pig in a bap?
I can say without fear of contradiction that I have never brought dinner to the table, only for the table to collapse under it's weight. It rather defeats the idea of being a table, don't you think?
Props? There are props now?
What???? No, I'm sorry, let me try that again. What????????and the furniture we see in Mr. Amaral’s pictures and verified that in fact the chairs were the same, and that a table from the Tapas Barwas used as the shadow (in blue) of the table legs’ X-format is clearly visible. This shadow comes from a table that's in the middle of the set of chairs (in yellow) near the beam.
Oh, if only
And then… and then I was struck by a fist.
I can understand why
No, not figuratively speaking, literally. Struck really hard by this fist:
Oh get on with it
No, I've lost the will to live
Shadow? The whole bloody thing is in shadow, you blind bint; it's night time!
"Where is the table’s shadow?" That was the question I asked.
What - there were no mirrors around?
And when I asked that question that was when the cricket ball should have hit not the teacup but me bonkers on the top of my head to serve me right and show me how stupid I was being.
Textusa, you are a cerebrally challenged blogger and compulsive liar with a table fixation - don't pretend you possess any forensic knowledge or skill because you simply don't. It's a bit of film shot in a small restaurant - not the set of Iron Man 4.
I even give myself the clue to the right path when, following that embarrassingly stupid question, I went and wrote that “Mr. Brunt has the left half of his face lit up, while the other side is in shadow, meaning that a light projector from his left was used.”
I should have never have asked where was the shadow, as it’s perfectly visible in the carefully positioned chair on the right of Mr. Brunt, but should have asked the following crucial question: where in the heck is the light?
It's there, between the table and the space that isn't the table. It's perfectly visible to everyone except the clinically insane - ah, I think I see your problem.
Where is the light on the table? Where exactly on that side of the table does the light end and the shadow begin?In other words, where is the EDGE of the table??
There is one. Stop wetting your pants, you mad harpy.
There isn’t one and it should be one there. No, not SHOULD be but HAD to be!
Observe the following on the above picture. One can see light reflected on Mr Brunt’s closed fist and even in what is visible of his forearm, which is quite a bit, when this part of his body is actually at angle thatgets no direct light, that being the reason it’s not as bright as the fingers, but still perfectly visible. One can outline distinctly the knuckle line in Mr Brunt's fist.
Yes there is. Don't be silly.
Mr Brunt’s knuckles form an edge which is clearly visible but right in front of it there's no clearly defined table edge!! Could someone please show me a clearly defined table edge in the white trapezium above? There isn't any!!
Not least because you don't know what they are
And darkness doesn't serve as an excuse because there had to be one by the amount of light thatilluminates so well the chair on the right of Mr. Brunt!
We’re either before a most strange phenomenon that defies the expansion of light waves or before some sort of illusion.
I don't know about you but I'm not going against the laws of physics.
Let's save some time.
You are pretending that there is no edge to the table and that it's an artificially created image. This is bollocks. The only illusion is the one you are attempting to pull.
Of course you do. Matron, the syringe if you please
And this illusionism might just explain one of the most interesting things there is to be watched on Mr Brunt’s report. Some may call it the “fidgeting edge” but I prefer, to maintain things within the ballet theme, to call it the “ballerina table”.
And there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. The ''Negligence Pirouette". This remarkable move consists of Mr Brunt getting up from the table and walking off. One wonders what other dance moves he might have executed instead; a ''Don't give a shit'' polka, perhaps, a ''Fuck You'' foxtrot, or a ''Twatdangle'' tango?
Like a ballerina that is up on her toes and doesn't go anywhere although we can see her feet in movement so the same happens with the table. With the “ballerina table” if you watch when Mr. Bruntdoes his "Negligence Pirouette" (from 1:35) you can see that edge move, flickering a couple or more times, and, like the ballerina, goes nowhere.
Textusa claims that the table ''flickers'' briefly and then goes nowhere, a move which for reasons best left for her psychiatrist to explore, she likens to a ballerina.
Quite why she decided that his getting up required such a fanfare, but if I were him I should be careful about reaching for a paper and saying ''Seeing as I'm up, I might as well go for a dump", lest she turn that seemingly mundane operation into a 4 hour rock opera with a guest appearance by Dame Kiri Te Kanawa
So there you have it. Brunt was filmed at the table that Textusa claimed never was. Someone said ''Hang on, Brunty was filmed at that table'' and so Textusa had to make the table go away. Any normal person would have said "oh yes, you're right. There's the table"
But Textaloons aren't normal people
It has not been digitally remastered. To prove the point, here is the same picture, enlarged slightly and with the brightness and contrast increased.The edge moving is just a consequence of the fact the image has been digitally manipulated, or I think the correct term is remastered, with the intent to hide in the best possible way the REAL edge of the table on the right side of Mr. Brunt, something that should be clearly discernible but after this is done,no longer was.
|It's a big fucking table. Now fuck off|
The red line is roughly where the edge of the table is. What follows is one of the most nonsensical piles of steaming excrement you are ever likely to accidentally tread in
No it isn't. And what you know about ''image manipulation'' could be written on the back of a sultana.
It doesn't take an expert that there are areas where it seems that some of the colouring seems like it was done with a large paintbrush:
This is not the way pixels spread out when an image is enlarged. You can testify to that by looking at the various images we've enlarged in this and other posts. This is pure image manipulation.
How does she type that with a straight face?
Knowing that we were before a visual HOAX we stopped looking for an external or internal table because we had first to try and determine what table we were looking for!To solve our problem we got an unexpected help from Mr Brunt when he does his “Negligence Pirouette”:
Oh my god - seriously? Call the cops
This is priceless stuff. She's utterly barking. I am going to bow out here and let you enjoy her desperation unmolested by me. If you want to fast forward, scroll down until you see red type again. Good luck and see you on the other side.
It’s an ever so slight movement but enough to alter the “lighting arrangement” and with it may just provide a clue that answers many questions.
This is my personal favourite. You can clearly see the edge of the table, but she decides to draw in a new one! Seriously, the loons who fawned all over her and told her how wonderful she was must have been taking the piss. No-one could be that dense.
We went back to the Tapas Bar round tables. What did we know of them? Not much. Only that they were of the same dimension as the square tables as we’ve said already. And that both types had the same X-format fold away legs.
We noticed that the square tables had a pattern, quadrilateral designs, each made up of 7 wooden slats, within an outer border:
Now it made sense that the furniture, for obvious decorative reasons, were bought in bulk, thus, as example, all the chairs are the exact same type.
Unfortunately, if we have little imagery of the Tapas esplanade, we have less than that on the Tapas Bar round tables. We only have two pictures, and both from Mr. Amaral’s book. And only one shows the top of the table but at a very slanted angle:
Augmented, it tell us nothing about the tabletop. It can have a pattern but it can also be with no pattern at all. So these are the two possibilities for the Tapas Bar round tables' tabletop, with a pattern and without one:
And similar to the one we find in the square tables:
Also you can also see in this picture what they so desperately tried to hide: the table's edge on the rightof Mr Brunt:
The "reflection" that you see in front of Mr Brunt's sleeve is not a reflection at all because it curves the opposite way. That, dear reader, is the illusive edge of the table.
And now we might understand that the reflection below (area in blue) is also a non-reflection but theinside of Mr Brunt's sleeve. If not that, then it's a reflection of what?
What a load of cobblers. He is clearly sat at a large round or oval table. End of story
And here is the manipulation. If you don't agree with her you are obviously a ''Black Hat"
What a stupid cow
Hilarious ! I am reminded of thisSo, in Swan Lake's terms, Von Rothbart (Mr Brunt) had transformed Odile (a Small Round Table (SRT)), so that she appears identical to Odette, (a Big Round Table (BRT), to Siegfrieds’ eyes.
You ARE a raving mad lunatic. This is not up for discussion
We’ve vainly, for almost 4 years, tried to show Siegfried that he is being deceived. But Siegfriedremained oblivious and proclaimed that it was Odette (a BRT), and those saying otherwise were raving mad lunatics.
'' Check it out, I'm the C-A-S-A, the N-O-V-A,
Von Rothbart (Mr Brunt) had showed Siegfried a magical vision of Odette (a BRT) and we now hope thatSiegfried now realises his mistake.
The SRT was never a BRT. The T9BRT never existed. “Odile” was just a Tapas Bar round table.
And the rest is F-L-Y,
You see I go by the code of the doctor of the mix,
And these reasons I'll tell you why.''
Oh please stop, I'm in pain now
It is a big fucking table you dozy twat
He's just sitting at a table. He wasn't to know that several years down the line a brain-damaged doxy from the lunatic side of the street would accuse him of doing a ''negligence pirouette'' and making a little table look huge. He'd only gone for a pint.......
We know that the Swan Lake has alternative endings, so we’ll patiently wait to see which fate will be chosen for the Final Act of this Maddie Affair. However, in none of the possibilities things end up well forVon Rothbart or Odille…
Mr Brunt, you can say that you set up the table as a prop in the way described for dramatic effectalleging that you believed that the story of the table was true.
Of course it was the fucking table. Fortunately, he doesn't share your delusions
But then, with each trick you saw yourself "forced" to use to make the story "true" shouldn't you have rapidly become a disbeliever?
The fact the piece was aired means that that didn't happen. And you're very clear in your words that that was THE table:
Christ, you are one venomous bitch
“I’m sitting at the table where the McCanns and their friends were eating on the night that Madeleine disappeared. This place is shut now for the winter.The apartment is some distance away, it’s beyond the swimming pool, there’s a wall and a hedge, and behind that there’s a path.It would be very difficult, from here, to see anybody going in and out of the apartment.Going to check on the kids wasn’t easy.Well, 80 paces as far as the gate, the distance between the Tapas Bar and the apartment, not quite as Gerry McCann described it.”
If we add to all this his unexpected “intimacy” with Jennifer and Robert Murat, we have to questionMr Brunt's role in PdL.
Oh give over, you vicious mad old trollop. The man filmed a piece to camera and is now off to show just how far it was to 5A. ''Left his soul''? My arse!
Seriously, get a life.Where the fuck do you get off making these accusations?
We’ll not go the easy route to condemn your actions Mr Brunt.
Many have sold their souls for much less and we understand your predicament under the circumstances.
This does not minimize an ounce of the severity of your actions, it just states that in the current state of affairs of modern societies the soulless survival is taken as a regular lifestyle.
Ah yes, this ''deed of yours''
We refuse to accept that.
At least without putting up a fight.
We hope that by exposing this deed of yours Mr Brunt we will allow your peers some “elbow room” in the real Big Round Table that life will never cease to be and they may act more independently than your generation of journalists or “journalists” was able to.
Shall we explain what this ''deed'' was?
Textusa claimed there was no Big Round Table
Someone turned up film of Martin Brunt sat at one.
Any normal person would realise they had made a mistake and re-evaluate their earlier claims.
But not Textusa. Instead she comes up with a post of devastating fuckwittery and accuses an innocent man of committing a crime. Evil hag.
We certainly do. We were almost out of toilet paper.......
Finally, a word to our readers. We hope that you understand the importance of this post.
She's probably still pissing herself, Textusa
First, to our reader Guerra, who submitted the video such a long time ago, we hope that now you understand the reasons for taking so long. The clues, as you can see, are all there to be seen immediately but the process of proving what we saw had to be a painstakingly meticulous one and this takes time, a resource none of us have that much to spare from our personal lives.
Need a long lie down after that, eh?
Second, we’d like to inform our readers that, for personal reasons, we’re taking another break until the end of the month. We’ll continue to publish your comments, which, as you well know, are posts by themselves and the reason many come to visit the blog.
|Martin Brunt, practicing his Negligence Pirouette|