"Start by Asking Yourself What is a Supporter and Work on from There”

[faithlilly]

I thought it would be interesting asking the same question as the ‘ sceptic ‘ thread but in relation to supporters.

[Sunny]

OK here is my opinion of some supporters (of the couple).  This is not a carte blanche picture of my impression of every supporter just some I have seen whilst looking into the case.

It seems to me that Kate & Gerry can do no wrong in their eyes with the possible exception of leaving the children alone.  Everything the McCanns have said or done is justified in the eyes of the supporters, weirdly though this appears to include Leonor Cipriano the convicted murderer of her own 8 year old daughter Joanna. I see very little mention of Joanna only Leonor, which I find very odd.

To a supporter anything or anyone that indicates any possible guilt in anything even something small is to be derided and explained away.       

Looking on other forums as I have done in the last year or so, I see sceptics have been insulted, laughed at, have their physical appearance picked apart and their photographs put on open threads for anyone to see.

Personally I find this type of behaviour reprehensible and seeing how Brenda Leyland was treated by both the media and the supporters elsewhere (and to a lesser degree here), I can't understand why an adult discussion cannot go ahead without name calling and personal insults.

Just my thoughts and opinion of course.

[Mr Gray]

OK here is my opinion of some supporters (of the couple).  This is not a carte blanche picture of my impression of every supporter just some I have seen whilst looking into the case.

It seems to me that Kate & Gerry can do no wrong in their eyes with the possible exception of leaving the children alone.  Everything the McCanns have said or done is justified in the eyes of the supporters, weirdly though this appears to include Leonor Cipriano the convicted murderer of her own 8 year old daughter Joanna. I see very little mention of Joanna only Leonor, which I find very odd.

To a supporter anything or anyone that indicates any possible guilt in anything even something small is to be derided and explained away.     

Looking on other forums as I have done in the last year or so, I see sceptics have been insulted, laughed at, have their physical appearance picked apart and their photographs put on open threads for anyone to see.

Personally I find this type of behaviour reprehensible and seeing how Brenda Leyland was treated by both the media and the supporters elsewhere (and to a lesser degree here), I can't understand why an adult discussion cannot go ahead without name calling and personal insults.

Just my thoughts and opinion of course.

could you explain what is wrong with giving a counter argumnet to claims of evidence

[Sunny]

could you explain what is wrong with giving a counter argumnet to claims of evidence

Nothing at all except if you see what I posted


To a supporter anything or anyone that indicates any possible guilt in anything even something small is to be derided and explained away. 

Of course I have no problem with anyone giving a counter claim as long as it is factually based and relevant cites are provided, what I do have an issue with is when sceptics are called stupid and told they are incapable of reading and understanding evidence.  Also have you found anything at all that you would criticise the McCanns or their friends for, apart from saying they left the children alone

ETA because of your later post.

Of course abuse seems to come from both sides and just because it does it doesn't mean this thread needs to be simply about that Davel.   Why is your sole aim to talk about sceptics abuse of supporters. It works both ways and I have seen unpleasantness from sceptics and supporters both here and elsewhere.

[Mr Gray]

Nothing at all except if you see what I posted


To a supporter anything or anyone that indicates any possible guilt in anything even something small is to be derided and explained away. 

Of course I have no problem with anyone giving a counter claim as long as it is factually based and relevant cites are provided, what I do have an issue with is when sceptics are called stupid and told they are incapable of reading and understanding evidence.  Also have you found anything at all that you would criticise the McCanns or their friends for, apart from saying they left the children alone

ETA because of your later post.

Of course abuse seems to come from both sides and just because it does it doesn't mean this thread needs to be simply about that Davel.   Why is your sole aim to talk about sceptics abuse of supporters. It works both ways and I have seen unpleasantness from sceptics and supporters both here and elsewhere.

I have nothing to criticise the mccanns for apart from .they were wrong to leave the children...whats wrong with taht

[Mr Gray]

to me a supporter is someone who believes the mccanns are telling the truth....they found maddie gone and the window open... and they have no idea where she is

[Sunny]

I have nothing to criticise the mccanns for aoart from .they were wrong to leave the children...whats wrong with taht

There you go then Davel you have proved my point as to what a supporter is and as you have agreed you are a supporter then IMO I was correct in my post.

Davel the post below though I can't agree with

 my arguments are factually based....re understanding evidence  qualified by opinion.

Not all of your claims are factual as you are unable to provide cites for them.  We have previous on this you and I so I don't want to go into it again but you know what claims and when you said them.   

But as you said before

It may be fact but until it is shown to be fact it's opinion

[Mr Gray]

There you go then Davel you have proved my point as to what a supporter is and as you have agreed you are a supporter then IMO I was correct in my post.

Davel the post below though I can't agree with

Not all of your claims are factual as you are unable to provide cites for them.  We have previous on this you and I so I don't want to go into it again but you know what claims and when you said them.   

But as you said before

I think you are really struggling,,my claims e evidence are factual or qualified by imo... I probably provide more cites than any other poster..imo

[Sunny]

I think you are really struggling,,my claims e evidence are factual or qualified by imo... I probably provide more cites than any other poster..imo

That could be because you have far more posts than any other posters but even you fail from time to time as I have found out.

[Robittybob1]

You can't say "obvious" and then IMO, in my opinion.

obvious
ˈɒbvɪəs/Submit
adjective
easily perceived or understood; clear, self-evident, or apparent.

The use of obvious goes way beyond opinion IMO.

It certainly raises the veracity of the opinion in the opinion holder.  But  I think you can have an opinion, with a conclusion that appear obvious to the poster.

[Sunny]

It certainly raises the veracity of the opinion in the opinion holder.  But  I think you can have an opinion, with a conclusion that appear obvious to the poster.

But is this

I think you are really struggling,,my claims e evidence are factual or qualified by imo... I probably provide more cites than any other poster..imo

obvious to you Robittybob1 as an impartial observer in our discussion?  This was what Davel was referring to.

[Venturi Swirl]

OK here is my opinion of some supporters (of the couple).  This is not a carte blanche picture of my impression of every supporter just some I have seen whilst looking into the case.

It seems to me that Kate & Gerry can do no wrong in their eyes with the possible exception of leaving the children alone.  Everything the McCanns have said or done is justified in the eyes of the supporters, weirdly though this appears to include Leonor Cipriano the convicted murderer of her own 8 year old daughter Joanna. I see very little mention of Joanna only Leonor, which I find very odd.

To a supporter anything or anyone that indicates any possible guilt in anything even something small is to be derided and explained away.       

Looking on other forums as I have done in the last year or so, I see sceptics have been insulted, laughed at, have their physical appearance picked apart and their photographs put on open threads for anyone to see.

Personally I find this type of behaviour reprehensible and seeing how Brenda Leyland was treated by both the media and the supporters elsewhere (and to a lesser degree here), I can't understand why an adult discussion cannot go ahead without name calling and personal insults.

Just my thoughts and opinion of course.

Which forums post pictures of scetpics to be insulted and laughed at?  That’s a new one on me.  Poor sceptics, they are such grown up, polite,decent folk none would ever use another’s personal details to intimidate, threaten, mock or deride, of course. 

[Sunny]

Which forums post pictures of scetpics to be insulted and laughed at?  That’s a new one on me.  Poor sceptics, they are such grown up, polite,decent folk none would ever use another’s personal details to intimidate, threaten, mock or deride, of course.

Do you really want me to find the posts on the forums and share them here?

I see you too are deriding sceptics in your post so showing my initial post was correct IMO.

There are so called nasty posters on both sides of the fence. I have seen it from my viewings of various fora but the only ones that appear to post up photographs of the opposition (so to speak)  are the supporters forums so far as I have seen.

[Venturi Swirl]

Do you really want me to find the posts on the forums and share them here?

I see you too are deriding sceptics in your post so showing my initial post was correct IMO.

There are so called nasty posters on both sides of the fence. I have seen it from my viewings of various fora but the only ones that appear to post up photographs of the opposition (so to speak)  are the supporters forums so far as I have seen.

Really?  I am quite astounded by that view.  I am not aware on any supporter forum that has posted up pictures of sceptics to laugh at, I am however aware of a few places where sceptics post where certain well known McCann supporters are mocked on an almost daily basis, their likenesses photoshopped to make them appear grotesque and where certain supporters on this forum have been discussed in openly hostile and disparaging terms.

[Sunny]

Really?  I am quite astounded by that view.  I am not aware on any supporter forum that has posted up pictures of sceptics to laugh at, I am however aware of a few places where sceptics post where certain well known McCann supporters are mocked on an almost daily basis, their likenesses photoshopped to make them appear grotesque and where certain supporters on this forum have been discussed in openly hostile and disparaging terms.

I find that impossible to believe, sorry Vertigo Swirl. You have already said you post on many fora and for you to have been interested in this case for this long you must have seen these posts. I am not about to share them here but if an impartial moderator such as Robittybob1 would like me to do so I will do my best to find them again and share the posts with them so they can confirm that I am correct in what I say.