Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Rosie on Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:39 pm

Original Message----
From: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Date: 28/03/2010 15:15
To: "ANTHONY BENNETT"
Subj: Madeleine case review - An amazing response by the Home Office to MF letter

From: ANTHONY BENNETT
Subject: Madeleine case review - An amazing response by the Home Office to MF letter
To: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Date: Sunday, 28 March, 2010, 15:14



An amazing response from the Home Secretary to The Madeleine Foundation (about the proposed Home Office Review of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann)

Article filed Sunday 28 March 2009 by The Madeleine Foundation

On our website is the long letter we wrote to the Home Secretary, Rt. Hon. Alan Johnson M.P., about the news that the Home Secretary was considering a ‘review’ by a British police force of the investigations about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann (see ‘Articles’ section, www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk).

The Home Office has a tracking system for incoming letters. We wrote our letter to him on Friday 12 March. The letter should have been received by the Home Office on 15 or 16 March.

On Friday 19 March, we enquired about the progress of our letter. A member of the staff of the Home Office’s Direct Communications Unit confirmed two details for us. First, the matter was being dealt with by the Home Office’s ‘PPPU’ - which we were told stands for the Police Powers and Procedures Unit. Second, we were told that ‘a reply to you is now being prepared’.

All well and good. We also asked for advice on where to send a further letter asking 12 questions of the Home Secretary under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) about the Madeleine McCann case. We were given that advice and promptly sent off an e-mail and hard copy letter to the ‘Direct Communications Unit’ as suggested (since then, we understand that a few dozen others have also asked the same 12 questions of the Home office).


Now, both our first letter on 12 March (and our subsequent FOIA request) dealt with matters clearly within the responsibility of the Home Office. These included:

1) Reports that the Home Office was about to, or had already, begun a ‘scoping exercise’ to assess the nature of any review that might be carried out by a police force in the U.K.

2) Further reports that the Home Office was considering (or had already embarked upon) such a review

3) Several reports that Home Secretary Alan Johnson had had a private meeting with the McCanns on these matters

4) Several reports that staff of the Home Office had also had meetings (in the plural) with the McCanns about the possibility of a review

5) Reports that the McCanns had originally approached the Home Office for their help on the above issues

6) Reports that the Home Office had already appointed West Yorkshire Police to carry out a review

7) Reports that the Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, Mr Jim Gamble, had recommended West Yorkshire Police as the best force to carry out any review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Well, a reply has been received, quite quick by government standards. Dated 22 March and received late last week, its reference number, for the record, is T4753/10. Perhaps more typically, the name and rank of the sender was not given, no specific e-mail address nor telephone extension number was given, and the signature of the person who signed the letter was illegible. It could be: ‘Pat Cramp’. Or it might be: ‘P.T. Crane’. Or it might be ‘Pot Craig’.


No matter, the contents were what really mattered. A holding letter saying that our letter and questions would be answered in due course was what we expected. But, instead, we got this:

*******

Direct Communications Unit

2 Marsham Stree
London
SW1P 4DF
Switchboard 020 7035 4848

Fax: 020 7035 4745

Telephone: 020 7035 4742

E-mail: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Website: [url=http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk]www.homeoffice.gov.uk[/url]

Our Ref: T4753/10

Date: 22 March 2010

Mr Tony Bennett
The Madeleine Foundation
66 Chippingfield
Harlow

CM17 0DJ

Dear Mr Bennett

Thank you for your letter dated 12 March 2010.


I would like to advise you that the matters raised are the responsibility of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

I have therefore transferred your letter and its enclosures to that department at King Charles Street, London, SW1A 2AH, telephone 020 7008 1500. They will arrange for a suitable reply to be sent to you.

Yours sincerely,



*******

That now gives us the task of both tracking down where our letter and its enclosures have gone to in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and making sure that it gets back to the Home Office to make sure it is answered.


Can a private meeting between the Home Secretary and the McCanns really be ‘the responsibility of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’?

We don’t think so.

We’ll keep you all posted. In the meantime, many thanks to all of you who sent off your FOIA questions to the Home Office. They’re very important questions and we await the replies with a great deal of interest.

Tony Bennett 28.3.2010 for The Madeleine Foundation

e-mail: ajsbennett@btinternet.com

Tel: 01279 635789

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Rosie on Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:42 pm

----Original Message----
From: ajsbennett@btinternet.com
Date: 29/03/2010 11:35
To: "ANTHONY BENNETT"
Subj: Madeleine McCann Refs 4652/10 and T4753/10 - Attn Howard Choppin

From: ANTHONY BENNETT
Subject: Madeleine McCann Refs 4652/10 and T4753/10 - Attn Howard Choppin
To: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Date: Monday, 29 March, 2010, 11:33



To: RT. HON. ALAN JOHNSON MP, HOME SECRETARY

Dear Mr Johnson (Attn. Mr Howard Choppin)

Today I telephoned the Home Office to enquire why your staff member P T Crane had sent my letter to you dated 12 March 2010, and its enclosures, to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), when it was plain that all matters in my letter concerned the Home Office and its responsibilities.

During my telephone call to your office this morning, which lasted from 9.24pm to 9.48pm, your Mr Howard Choppin eventually disclosed the following:

1. My letter was being dealt with under two separate references, T4652/10 amd T4653/10

2. I would eventually receive a reply from the Home Office under reference T4652/10

3. Reference T4652/10 was being dealt with by the PPPU of the Home Office (the Police Powers and Procedures Unit

4. The sending of my letter and all its enclosures to the FCO was a clear error

5. The letter and enclosures had been sent to the Direct Communications Unit of the FCO but your staff didn't know who was dealing with it there

6. Your Mr Choppin undertook to contact the FCO without delay and retrieve my letter and its enclosures and notify me as soon as these had been located and returned to the Home Office

7. Your Mr Choppin conceded that you and your staff would be unable to reply under reference T4552/10 without having the original letter and enclosures to hand

8. Your Mr Choppin believed that the PPPU might currently have a scanned copy of my original letter but NOT the enclosures. Any reply would therefore be delayed until you had recovered the letter and enclosures from the Foreign Office.

Given that on 19 March 2010 I was told by your Direct Communications Unit that the PPPU was dealing with my letter and that a response was being prepared it is very hard to see how the Direct Communications Unit could have made an accidental decision to pass the papers to a wholly different government department.

Finally, for your information, below is a message I put out on the internet yesterday about the Home Office's obvious error in this matter.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



An amazing response from the Home Secretary to The Madeleine Foundation (about the proposed Home Office Review of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann)







Article filed Sunday 28 March 2009 by The Madeleine Foundation



On our website is the long letter we wrote to the Home Secretary, Rt. Hon. Alan Johnson M.P., about the news that the Home Secretary was considering a ‘review’ by a British police force of the investigations about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann (see ‘Articles’ section, www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk).



The Home Office has a tracking system for incoming letters. We wrote our letter to him on Friday 12 March. The letter should have been received by the Home Office on 15 or 16 March.



On Friday 19 March, we enquired about the progress of our letter. A member of the staff of the Home Office’s Direct Communications Unit confirmed two details for us. First, the matter was being dealt with by the Home Office’s ‘PPPU’ - which we were told stands for the Police Powers and Procedures Unit. Second, we were told that ‘a reply to you is now being prepared’.



All well and good. We also asked for advice on where to send a further letter asking 12 questions of the Home Secretary under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) about the Madeleine McCann case. We were given that advice and promptly sent off an e-mail and hard copy letter to the ‘Direct Communications Unit’ as suggested (since then, we understand that a few dozen others have also asked the same 12 questions of the Home office).



Now, both our first letter on 12 March (and our subsequent FOIA request) dealt with matters clearly within the responsibility of the Home Office. These included:



1) Reports that the Home Office was about to, or had already, begun a ‘scoping exercise’ to assess the nature of any review that might be carried out by a police force in the U.K.

2) Further reports that the Home Office was considering (or had already embarked upon) such a review

3) Several reports that Home Secretary Alan Johnson had had a private meeting with the McCanns on these matters

4) Several reports that staff of the Home Office had also had meetings (in the plural) with the McCanns about the possibility of a review

5) Reports that the McCanns had originally approached the Home Office for their help on the above issues

6) Reports that the Home Office had already appointed West Yorkshire Police to carry out a review

7) Reports that the Chief Executive of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, Mr Jim Gamble, had recommended West Yorkshire Police as the best force to carry out any review into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.



Well, a reply has been received, quite quick by government standards. Dated 22 March and received late last week, its reference number, for the record, is T4753/10. Perhaps more typically, the name and rank of the sender was not given, no specific e-mail address nor telephone extension number was given, and the signature of the person who signed the letter was illegible. It could be: ‘Pat Cramp’. Or it might be: ‘P.T. Crane’. Or it might be ‘Pot Craig’.



No matter, the contents were what really mattered. A holding letter saying that our letter and questions would be answered in due course was what we expected. But, instead, we got this:



*******


Direct Communications Unit



2 Marsham Street

London

SW1P 4DF

Switchboard 020 7035 4848

Fax: 020 7035 4745

Telephone: 020 7035 4742

E-mail: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Website: www.homeoffice.gov.uk
Our Ref: T4753/10



Date: 22 March 2010



Mr Tony Bennett

The Madeleine Foundation

66 Chippingfield

Harlow

CM17 0DJ



Dear Mr Bennett



Thank you for your letter dated 12 March 2010.



I would like to advise you that the matters raised are the responsibility of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.



I have therefore transferred your letter and its enclosures to that department at King Charles Street, London, SW1A 2AH, telephone 020 7008 1500. They will arrange for a suitable reply to be sent to you.



Yours sincerely,



*******



That now gives us the task of both tracking down where our letter and its enclosures have gone to in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and making sure that it gets back to the Home Office to make sure it is answered.



Can a private meeting between the Home Secretary and the McCanns really be ‘the responsibility of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’?



We don’t think so.



We’ll keep you all posted. In the meantime, many thanks to all of you who sent off your FOIA questions to the Home Office. They’re very important questions and we await the replies with a great deal of interest.





Tony Bennett 28.3.2010 for The Madeleine Foundation

e-mail: ajsbennett@btinternet.com

Tel: 01279 635789

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yours sincerely

Tony Bennett
Secretary
The Madeleine Foundation
01279 635789

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Catkins on Wed Mar 31, 2010 11:54 pm

Because he is a self important....deluded little wind bag !!
avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1829
Location : UK
Registration date : 2009-02-11

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Mulleena on Thu Apr 01, 2010 1:05 am

He has no business writing to anyone about anything concerning Madeleine or her Parents!!

No doubt he'll ask to be refunded for the cost of the phone call he made.

Mulleena
Learner
Learner

Number of posts : 122
Location : Wiltshire
Registration date : 2010-03-24

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Thu Apr 01, 2010 7:26 am

"An amazing response from the Home Secretary to The Madeleine Foundation (about the proposed Home Office Review of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann)"

Well, thats the first time I've ever seen the sex and travel option referred to as an amazing response, lol.

_________________
'The motives of those who have tried to convince the world that Madeleine is dead, and who've disgracefully and falsely tried to implicate us in her disappearance, need to be seriously questioned.'
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by dianeh on Thu Apr 01, 2010 8:36 am

I cant even get the gist of what that boring post is getting at. Of course, it is my lack of will to read it that is the problem.

But I get that he sent his letter to the wrong place, and it has been forwarded but without the attachments, and some depts have to have originals before they will answer.

All I see is a typical public service response (seems British public service is the same as the Aussie one), and that his request has got nowhere. And quite rightly. The public servants have word to do and should not be wasting their time answering to a stalker, who is continuing to stalk and harrass a couple who have lost their child, and who is facing legal actions for libel against the same couple. He (IMO) should not be entitled to any information about the McCanns, due to the libel actions against him.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Peaceful1 on Thu Apr 01, 2010 1:35 pm

Rosei, you've heard the term 'Baffle them with Bullsh*t'..
Exactly what bennett does, to everyone.
WTF does he have to think he needs to be involved in the case of a missing child? Whoe the feck does he think he is??
That man makes my bloody boil.
But I suspect that's the kind of reaction he wants. Any reaction is a result in his mind!
Stupid half baked brain dead pill*ck he is!
avatar
Peaceful1
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1104
Location : Australia
Registration date : 2009-07-18

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by vee8 on Thu Apr 01, 2010 4:58 pm

Tinkerbell43 wrote:"An amazing response from the Home Secretary to The Madeleine Foundation (about the proposed Home Office Review of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann)"

Well, thats the first time I've ever seen the sex and travel option referred to as an amazing response, lol.



I didn't get that last night, I just got it now!
avatar
vee8
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3113
Location : suffolk
Registration date : 2008-06-24

http://www.madeleine-adestinybegun.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Catkins on Thu Apr 01, 2010 9:28 pm

Peaceful1 wrote:Rosei, you've heard the term 'Baffle them with Bullsh*t'..
Exactly what bennett does, to everyone.
WTF does he have to think he needs to be involved in the case of a missing child? Whoe the feck does he think he is??
That man makes my bloody boil.
But I suspect that's the kind of reaction he wants. Any reaction is a result in his mind!
Stupid half baked brain dead pill*ck he is!
Totally agree............
avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1829
Location : UK
Registration date : 2009-02-11

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Rosie on Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:33 pm

Tinkerbell43 wrote:"An amazing response from the Home Secretary to The Madeleine Foundation (about the proposed Home Office Review of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann)"

Well, thats the first time I've ever seen the sex and travel option referred to as an amazing response, lol.


_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Rosie on Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:38 pm

Diane Said....

I cant even get the gist of what that boring post is getting at. Of course, it is my lack of will to read it that is the problem.

I know what you mean, my tolerance level of Bennett's posts is one sentence at a time before I zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


by Peaceful1 Today at 3:35 am

Rosei, you've heard the term 'Baffle them with Bullsh*t'..
Exactly what bennett does, to everyone.
WTF does he have to think he needs to be involved in the case of a missing child? Whoe the feck does he think he is??
That man makes my bloody boil.
But I suspect that's the kind of reaction he wants. Any reaction is a result in his mind!
Stupid half baked brain dead pill*ck he is!



Personally I think you are being way too generous Peaceful, his brain is non existent!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: God Gives Us Strength - Why Is Everything Bennett Attempts So Long Winded?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum