Author Topic: What is an 'internet troll'?  (Read 161708 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #120 on: July 27, 2015, 11:42:07 AM »
Do we have the full SP on why Mr Milligan faces jail?
I guess that has more to do with threatening rape rather than making distasteful comments about Madeleine McCann and Mikaeel Kular.
I love Brietta's idea of a Machiavellian character behind Mr Milligan putting him up to it.
Is that just the distasteful comments, Brie, or the rape threat as well?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Brietta

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #121 on: July 27, 2015, 12:23:19 PM »
There are some who have been indulging themselves in an eight year long "questioning fest" of the Drs McCann for obscure reasons known only to themselves.

Within those ranks it is possible there are those who haven't given rational thought to the longer reaching consequences of their on-line activities.



WE'VE BEEN GIVEN A LIFE SENTENCE OF DESPAIR
 
As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...


‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow.
The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz




The AG's report effectively closed the door on any excuse for anyone to set themselves up as judge jury and executioner for the Drs McCann who despite everything Mr Amaral's investigation could throw at them produced not one single shred of evidence pointing to their guilt.

A situation verified by the subsequent Rebello investigation

At the moment Madeleine McCann's re-opened case is in the safe hands of police from two jurisdictions on the basis of fresh evidence ... which yet again ... does not implicate her parents, as evidenced by the fact the investigations have formally directed their enquiries elsewhere.

Madeleine has siblings who have been treated in cavalier fashion by unthinking (if it is deliberate it is even more heinous) fashion by internet trolls ... who have not considered the effect their ravings may have on two innocent children who cannot fail to come across them.

Colin Caffell's description of the effect just googling her name has had on his daughter should be a salutary lesson, but there again there are some very weird opinions swimming about on the www.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #122 on: July 27, 2015, 01:21:52 PM »
There are some who have been indulging themselves in an eight year long "questioning fest" of the Drs McCann for obscure reasons known only to themselves.

Within those ranks it is possible there are those who haven't given rational thought to the longer reaching consequences of their on-line activities.



WE'VE BEEN GIVEN A LIFE SENTENCE OF DESPAIR
 
As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...


‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow.
The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz




The AG's report effectively closed the door on any excuse for anyone to set themselves up as judge jury and executioner for the Drs McCann who despite everything Mr Amaral's investigation could throw at them produced not one single shred of evidence pointing to their guilt.

A situation verified by the subsequent Rebello investigation

At the moment Madeleine McCann's re-opened case is in the safe hands of police from two jurisdictions on the basis of fresh evidence ... which yet again ... does not implicate her parents, as evidenced by the fact the investigations have formally directed their enquiries elsewhere.

Madeleine has siblings who have been treated in cavalier fashion by unthinking (if it is deliberate it is even more heinous) fashion by internet trolls ... who have not considered the effect their ravings may have on two innocent children who cannot fail to come across them.

Colin Caffell's description of the effect just googling her name has had on his daughter should be a salutary lesson, but there again there are some very weird opinions swimming about on the www.

Do you think a global principle should apply to this lack of rational thought to consequences or should it apply only to those considered worthy on some kind of arbitrary scale ?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline G-Unit

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #123 on: July 27, 2015, 01:38:15 PM »
There are some who have been indulging themselves in an eight year long "questioning fest" of the Drs McCann for obscure reasons known only to themselves.

Within those ranks it is possible there are those who haven't given rational thought to the longer reaching consequences of their on-line activities.



WE'VE BEEN GIVEN A LIFE SENTENCE OF DESPAIR
 
As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...


‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow.
The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz




The AG's report effectively closed the door on any excuse for anyone to set themselves up as judge jury and executioner for the Drs McCann who despite everything Mr Amaral's investigation could throw at them produced not one single shred of evidence pointing to their guilt.

A situation verified by the subsequent Rebello investigation

At the moment Madeleine McCann's re-opened case is in the safe hands of police from two jurisdictions on the basis of fresh evidence ... which yet again ... does not implicate her parents, as evidenced by the fact the investigations have formally directed their enquiries elsewhere.

Madeleine has siblings who have been treated in cavalier fashion by unthinking (if it is deliberate it is even more heinous) fashion by internet trolls ... who have not considered the effect their ravings may have on two innocent children who cannot fail to come across them.

Colin Caffell's description of the effect just googling her name has had on his daughter should be a salutary lesson, but there again there are some very weird opinions swimming about on the www.

Now she can just read The Mail. Certain people become news for different reasons. Children have to learn lessons about the world at some point. It could be a newspaper, a book in the library, a google search or school mates. It's unfortunate but it's something people have to deal with in the best way they can. Is Jeremy Bamber an internet troll? I think not, so the post is off topic.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline carlymichelle

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #124 on: July 27, 2015, 01:45:10 PM »
its simple if the mcanns dont want the twins to see read things they need to put a net filter on their computers and  suppervise their  remaining kids .......  oh wait...

Offline Brietta

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #125 on: July 27, 2015, 04:16:26 PM »
Do you think a global principle should apply to this lack of rational thought to consequences or should it apply only to those considered worthy on some kind of arbitrary scale ?

I presume "those considered worthy" is a reference to the Drs McCann.

If there are individuals who are incapable of lucidly working out that their unceasingly excoriating campaigns for "justice" for one child may eventually have a damaging effect on other children in the same family ... what sort of "arbitrary scale"  would you think appropriate to put them on?

The child I mentioned in my initial post was so upset at the association she discovered on-line that she wanted to change her name.

Is any thought given to the stealing of the innocence of Madeleine's siblings who are going to have to be inured by gradual exposure to the evil which has been written about the parents who have nurtured them ... as well as the comments which have been directed at them.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline mercury

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #126 on: July 27, 2015, 05:48:35 PM »
There are some who have been indulging themselves in an eight year long "questioning fest" of the Drs McCann for obscure reasons known only to themselves.

Within those ranks it is possible there are those who haven't given rational thought to the longer reaching consequences of their on-line activities.



WE'VE BEEN GIVEN A LIFE SENTENCE OF DESPAIR
 
As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...


‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow.
The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz




The AG's report effectively closed the door on any excuse for anyone to set themselves up as judge jury and executioner for the Drs McCann who despite everything Mr Amaral's investigation could throw at them produced not one single shred of evidence pointing to their guilt.

A situation verified by the subsequent Rebello investigation

At the moment Madeleine McCann's re-opened case is in the safe hands of police from two jurisdictions on the basis of fresh evidence ... which yet again ... does not implicate her parents, as evidenced by the fact the investigations have formally directed their enquiries elsewhere.

Madeleine has siblings who have been treated in cavalier fashion by unthinking (if it is deliberate it is even more heinous) fashion by internet trolls ... who have not considered the effect their ravings may have on two innocent children who cannot fail to come across them.

Colin Caffell's description of the effect just googling her name has had on his daughter should be a salutary lesson, but there again there are some very weird opinions swimming about on the www.

Now we have Brietta's caustic and accusatory generic link between a mass murderer, yet again, the  other recent  one being Sutcliffe, to social commentators from all walks of life and on various platforms on the most high profile disappeared child in recent history case, people who have had valid questions and comments and by no stretch of the imagnation being only  "excoriating"






Offline G-Unit

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #127 on: July 27, 2015, 07:32:13 PM »
I presume "those considered worthy" is a reference to the Drs McCann.

If there are individuals who are incapable of lucidly working out that their unceasingly excoriating campaigns for "justice" for one child may eventually have a damaging effect on other children in the same family ... what sort of "arbitrary scale"  would you think appropriate to put them on?

The child I mentioned in my initial post was so upset at the association she discovered on-line that she wanted to change her name.

Is any thought given to the stealing of the innocence of Madeleine's siblings who are going to have to be inured by gradual exposure to the evil which has been written about the parents who have nurtured them ... as well as the comments which have been directed at them.

madeleine McCann's parents have been in the news for years by their own efforts. Sometimes the stories have been favourable sometimes not. What is a fact is that they courted publicity from the beginning.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #128 on: July 27, 2015, 07:34:48 PM »
I presume "those considered worthy" is a reference to the Drs McCann.

If there are individuals who are incapable of lucidly working out that their unceasingly excoriating campaigns for "justice" for one child may eventually have a damaging effect on other children in the same family ... what sort of "arbitrary scale"  would you think appropriate to put them on?

The child I mentioned in my initial post was so upset at the association she discovered on-line that she wanted to change her name.

Is any thought given to the stealing of the innocence of Madeleine's siblings who are going to have to be inured by gradual exposure to the evil which has been written about the parents who have nurtured them ... as well as the comments which have been directed at them.

I take it that means you think it is not global principle that should apply.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #129 on: July 27, 2015, 07:56:10 PM »
Now we have Brietta's caustic and accusatory generic link between a mass murderer, yet again, the  other recent  one being Sutcliffe, to social commentators from all walks of life and on various platforms on the most high profile disappeared child in recent history case, people who have had valid questions and comments and by no stretch of the imagnation being only  "excoriating"

lol and a questioning fest? My reasons are well known for questioning.

There is a very sad and difficult future facing the twins with regards to them being told stories by trolls or .......... I feel deeply sorry for them. I think Kate n Gerry have tried to sheild them to some extent, but then they did pay to have their face in the papers!  that attracts idiots, evil doers, and stalkers.  Kate and Gerry know this, they have experienced it. They should have just sat in the background quietly, waiting for the police to deal with things. But for reasons best known to themselves they DON'T!

Who knows how the twins will be affected by there parents behaviour.  Leaving them alone night after night, and Maddie being missing. They may forgve them or hate them, but that is their descision- not to be influenced by media commentators.

The story they need to know is simple- mum dad made a bad call/mistake,  Maddie is missing we don't know what happened to her.

 all the other rubbish about abductors/Amaral and suing and travelling and pretending to be VIPs should be knocked on the head!
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline mercury

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #130 on: July 27, 2015, 08:15:31 PM »
Well MTI, just another example of farming out the guilt, it's unacceptable and cheap. Valid criticism of gratuitous nasty posting or "threats" is OK, trying desperately to tie in people who "just don't buy it"  to mass murderers or poaedophiles or those in mental institutions is below the belt, usually backfires badly anyway, as its disingenuous at best

The other accusation about responsibility for damaging their children is also pathetic. They need to take responsibility for anythng they started and continued with
« Last Edit: July 27, 2015, 08:26:22 PM by mercury »

Offline Brietta

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #131 on: July 27, 2015, 10:15:46 PM »
I take it that means you think it is not global principle that should apply.

Name me a comparable situation.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #132 on: July 27, 2015, 10:24:18 PM »
Name me a comparable situation.

That is neither relevant to the question I asked nor to the question of principle.
So fundamentally your argument is that of "I shall be the arbiter of......"
Just so's we know where we are at.

"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Brietta

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #133 on: July 27, 2015, 10:30:26 PM »
lol and a questioning fest? My reasons are well known for questioning.

There is a very sad and difficult future facing the twins with regards to them being told stories by trolls or .......... I feel deeply sorry for them. I think Kate n Gerry have tried to sheild them to some extent, but then they did pay to have their face in the papers!  that attracts idiots, evil doers, and stalkers.  Kate and Gerry know this, they have experienced it. They should have just sat in the background quietly, waiting for the police to deal with things. But for reasons best known to themselves they DON'T!

Who knows how the twins will be affected by there parents behaviour.  Leaving them alone night after night, and Maddie being missing. They may forgve them or hate them, but that is their descision- not to be influenced by media commentators.

The story they need to know is simple- mum dad made a bad call/mistake,  Maddie is missing we don't know what happened to her.

 all the other rubbish about abductors/Amaral and suing and travelling and pretending to be VIPs should be knocked on the head!

This may come as a bit of a shock to you ... I have absolutely no conception what your reasons are for "questioning" although if it has taken you eight years of questions without working out an answer you may have a problem ... and this will come as less of a shock ... I don't give a tinker's curse.

I cannot think of a single reason why anyone would wish to defend or condone those who have trolled or abused Madeleine McCann's family for over eight years ... you seem to have your reasoning on that pretty well rehearsed.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Brietta

Re: What is an 'internet troll'?
« Reply #134 on: July 27, 2015, 10:37:36 PM »
madeleine McCann's parents have been in the news for years by their own efforts. Sometimes the stories have been favourable sometimes not. What is a fact is that they courted publicity from the beginning.

What is your visceral objection to Madeleine McCann's parents keeping her name in the public eye to the extent that officials have been forced to re-open her case ... and as an offshoot do you think the police would be working in Greece on Ben Needham's case if the Drs McCann had not forced action for Madeleine?

One of the troll mantras is " why McCann ... what about all the thousands of other missing children!!" ... in your own way you appear to give succour to that.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....