UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Alfred R Jones on October 20, 2015, 09:22:05 AM
-
There is constant carping on this forum about (amongst other things) the amount spent on Operation Grange, on all the poor children who have been mistaken for Madeleine over the years because of widely circulated age progression pics, the media celebrity status of the McCanns themselves, sueing the ex-cop who wrote a book on the basis that it harmed the search for her daughter and so on....
Would it have been better all round if the McCanns had drawn a line under Madeleine's disappearance years ago, not bothered writing a book themselves, not lobbied for a case review, withdrawn completely from the media and quietly applied for a Presumption of Death certificate seven years after her disappearance?
Would that have met with "sceptic" approval, seeing as how the McCanns have come in for severe criticism for doing the complete opposite and not giving up hope that their daughter may still be alive?
-
Would it have been better if the McCanns had given up on Madeline years ago? Better all round? It's difficult to answer because who would have gained?
The taxpayer would have saved millions of pounds, but we don't know how it would have been spent if not on Operation Grange.
The media wouldn't have sold as many newspapers, but some of them would have saved the money they paid out for libel.
Portuguese and British courts and lawyers would have been the poorer, as would assorted private investigation companies.
The McCanns would have avoided a lot of criticism, but they weren't criticised because they didn't give up looking for their daughter, they were criticised because of the methods they used and because their story was suspected of being untrue.
-
I don't think it would have been better for the McCann's to have given up on Madeleine years ago, for one she is their daughter whom they love and they could not have just not bother to try and find her.
I bet there isn't one person on this forum who wouldn't have done what the McCann's have done for Madeleine, if there is please lets hear what you would have done instead.
-
Would it have been better if the McCanns had given up on Madeline years ago? Better all round? It's difficult to answer because who would have gained?
The taxpayer would have saved millions of pounds, but we don't know how it would have been spent if not on Operation Grange.
The media wouldn't have sold as many newspapers, but some of them would have saved the money they paid out for libel.
Portuguese and British courts and lawyers would have been the poorer, as would assorted private investigation companies.
The McCanns would have avoided a lot of criticism, but they weren't criticised because they didn't give up looking for their daughter, they were criticised because of the methods they used and because their story was suspected of being untrue.
The person/people who committed the crime of taking a little girl away from her family would have gained, had the McCanns given up years ago. As it is, they will be constantly on tenterhooks, awaiting the knock on the door.
If all you care about is money, then remember we have spent £12m helping a foreigner escape the long arm of US/Swedish law & kept him in pizzas & shoulder massages for 3 years. Is that value for money? Are human rights more important than justice?
To give up on Madeleine would have consigned her to the same destiny as all the other missing children before her - gone & forgotten by everyone bar her nearest & dearest.
-
I don't think it would have been better for the McCann's to have given up on Madeleine years ago, for one she is their daughter whom they love and they could not have just not bother to try and find her.
I bet there isn't one person on this forum who wouldn't have done what the McCann's have done for Madeleine, if there is please lets hear what you would have done instead.
Your answer is only valid if the child was stolen and the parents are innocent. They failed to convince the Portuguese police at the time and they have failed to convince many others since.
-
The person/people who committed the crime of taking a little girl away from her family would have gained, had the McCanns given up years ago. As it is, they will be constantly on tenterhooks, awaiting the knock on the door.
If all you care about is money, then remember we have spent £12m helping a foreigner escape the long arm of US/Swedish law & kept him in pizzas & shoulder massages for 3 years. Is that value for money? Are human rights more important than justice?
To give up on Madeleine would have consigned her to the same destiny as all the other missing children before her - gone & forgotten by everyone bar her nearest & dearest.
Once again, your argument is only valid if someone did take a little girl away from her family.
-
The person/people who committed the crime of taking a little girl away from her family would have gained, had the McCanns given up years ago. As it is, they will be constantly on tenterhooks, awaiting the knock on the door.
If all you care about is money, then remember we have spent £12m helping a foreigner escape the long arm of US/Swedish law & kept him in pizzas & shoulder massages for 3 years. Is that value for money? Are human rights more important than justice?
To give up on Madeleine would have consigned her to the same destiny as all the other missing children before her - gone & forgotten by everyone bar her nearest & dearest.
We haven't. Spent 12 million pounds, Cameron has, on the clear behest of the Americans.
Surely, by your logic, all missing children should have the same amount of time and resources spent on them ?
-
In an alternative reality, the McCanns fade away into obscurity starting in 2008, they do not write a book, they do not lobby for the case to be reviewed, they do not give media interviews, they do not draw attention to themselves in any way - do they look on the face of it more or less guilty in the eyes of the "sceptics"?
Would we ever have had a re-opening of the case in the above scenario?
Would we still be discussing this case in the absence of any new material to fan the flames?
-
Once again, your argument is only valid if someone did take a little girl away from her family.
If someone did take Madeleine away from her family, would it have been better all round (for you, for the country's coffers and general well-being, for the McCanns themselves) if they had just accepted that fact and got on with their lives quietly?
-
Your answer is only valid if the child was stolen and the parents are innocent. They failed to convince the Portuguese police at the time and they have failed to convince many others since.
The fact that they did all that they did, makes it more realistic that the parents are innocent and that Madeleine was abducted.
It would have been so easy for the McCann's to have thought 'phew, we got away with it' and to have just let it all fade away, but they didn't, they hired PI's they sued Amaral they petitioned for a review which got the case reopened, they have tried to keep Madeleine in the spot light.
If they were guilty why the hell do that?
-
We haven't. Spent 12 million pounds, Cameron has, on the clear behest of the Americans.
Surely, by your logic, all missing children should have the same amount of time and resources spent on them ?
We have spent £12m because of our obligations under the rules of international political asylum, not because of the US.
My logic dictates that the amount of time & resources spent on a missing child are dependent on the circumstances. Madeleine's case is almost unique.
There are relatively few children under 10 in the UK missing with fate unknown. Their cases have not been consigned to the scrapheap.
There are several who have been taken overseas by a parent to a country which has no extradition treaty with us & the other parent in this country has no legal rights to regain custody.
It is a question of where the moral & legal boundary should be drawn.
-
If someone did take Madeleine away from her family, would it have been better all round (for you, for the country's coffers and general well-being, for the McCanns themselves) if they had just accepted that fact and got on with their lives quietly?
If someone didn't take Madeleine away from her family, would it have been better all round (for you, for the country's coffers and general well-being, for the McCanns themselves) if they had just accepted that fact and got on with their lives quietly?
-
The fact that they did all that they did, makes it more realistic that the parents are innocent and that Madeleine was abducted.
It would have been so easy for the McCann's to have thought 'phew, we got away with it' and to have just let it all fade away, but they didn't, they hired PI's they sued Amaral they petitioned for a review which got the case reopened, they have tried to keep Madeleine in the spot light.
If they were guilty why the hell do that?
You are assuming that the parents drove everything that followed. The parents made very strong statements in the beginning. Madeleine had been taken from her bed, they weren't neglectful, they were innocent.
They got hordes of people supporting them. Friends, family, football and rugby stars, legal firms, politicians and the media. The bandwagon was rolling along after that with or without their input. We don't know if they ever tried to get off it. Madeleine wasn't their exclusive property she had a wider family and now, thanks to the publicity, hordes of people interested in her and her parents. It's possible that events were driven by others just as much as by them. Maybe it just proved too difficult to stop the bandwagon rolling along even if they wanted to.
-
I don't think it would have been better for the McCann's to have given up on Madeleine years ago, for one she is their daughter whom they love and they could not have just not bother to try and find her.
I bet there isn't one person on this forum who wouldn't have done what the McCann's have done for Madeleine, if there is please lets hear what you would have done instead.
If the test is boiled down to continue searching v stop searching, then I would have continued searching.
Beyond that, the list of things I would have done differently is too long to itemise. The de-emphasis of Smithman from when he emerged to the current time is shocking, to put it mildly.
-
You are assuming that the parents drove everything that followed. The parents made very strong statements in the beginning. Madeleine had been taken from her bed, they weren't neglectful, they were innocent.
They got hordes of people supporting them. Friends, family, football and rugby stars, legal firms, politicians and the media. The bandwagon was rolling along after that with or without their input. We don't know if they ever tried to get off it. Madeleine wasn't their exclusive property she had a wider family and now, thanks to the publicity, hordes of people interested in her and her parents. It's possible that events were driven by others just as much as by them. Maybe it just proved too difficult to stop the bandwagon rolling along even if they wanted to.
Do you view the bandwagon as a bad thing & do you think they are still riding high on it?
-
If someone didn't take Madeleine away from her family, would it have been better all round (for you, for the country's coffers and general well-being, for the McCanns themselves) if they had just accepted that fact and got on with their lives quietly?
It would certainly have been much better for the McCanns in such a circumstance, but the fact is they didn't choose that path did they? Try and answer my question properly now.
-
You are assuming that the parents drove everything that followed. The parents made very strong statements in the beginning. Madeleine had been taken from her bed, they weren't neglectful, they were innocent.
They got hordes of people supporting them. Friends, family, football and rugby stars, legal firms, politicians and the media. The bandwagon was rolling along after that with or without their input. We don't know if they ever tried to get off it. Madeleine wasn't their exclusive property she had a wider family and now, thanks to the publicity, hordes of people interested in her and her parents. It's possible that events were driven by others just as much as by them. Maybe it just proved too difficult to stop the bandwagon rolling along even if they wanted to.
That is sheer nonsense. No one forced them to write a book or petition the government. Kate could have pretended to have a nervous breakdown, they could have said that for the good of their remaining children they were withdrawing from the spotlight, anything.
-
Do you view the bandwagon as a bad thing & do you think they are still riding high on it?
The bandwagon was a bandwagon, it can't be said if it was a good thing or a bad thing, it was a mixture. The cast changed - Esther McVey , Brian Kennedy, J K Rowling, Gordon Brown, Tony and Cherie Blair to name but a few. Is it still rolling? I think not. Now and again a twitch in the media but not a bandwagon any more.
-
The bandwagon was a bandwagon, it can't be said if it was a good thing or a bad thing, it was a mixture. The cast changed - Esther McVey , Brian Kennedy, J K Rowling, Gordon Brown, Tony and Cherie Blair to name but a few. Is it still rolling? I think not. Now and again a twitch in the media but not a bandwagon any more.
And when do you believe this bandwagon stopped rolling? All those names associated themselves with the case in the first year or two, there have been many years since in which the McCanns could have quietly drawn a line under their daughter's disappearance and slipped away from the media and any attention.
-
The bandwagon was a bandwagon, it can't be said if it was a good thing or a bad thing, it was a mixture. The cast changed - Esther McVey , Brian Kennedy, J K Rowling, Gordon Brown, Tony and Cherie Blair to name but a few. Is it still rolling? I think not. Now and again a twitch in the media but not a bandwagon any more.
Do you think the bandwagon was largely responsible for getting this Tory government to address the whole issue of child abuse/trafficking, both current & historical?
-
That is sheer nonsense. No one forced them to write a book or petition the government. Kate could have pretended to have a nervous breakdown, they could have said that for the good of their remaining children they were withdrawing from the spotlight, anything.
Was the book her idea or someone else's? I don't know. I do know the deciding factor was money because she said so.
Was it their idea to petition the government? I don't know. I do think they wanted the Portuguese investigation completely discredited. Hence the request for a review, not an investigation. Had they gone into obscurity they would have been forever suspects.
-
You are assuming that the parents drove everything that followed. The parents made very strong statements in the beginning. Madeleine had been taken from her bed, they weren't neglectful, they were innocent.
They got hordes of people supporting them. Friends, family, football and rugby stars, legal firms, politicians and the media. The bandwagon was rolling along after that with or without their input. We don't know if they ever tried to get off it. Madeleine wasn't their exclusive property she had a wider family and now, thanks to the publicity, hordes of people interested in her and her parents. It's possible that events were driven by others just as much as by them. Maybe it just proved too difficult to stop the bandwagon rolling along even if they wanted to.
No, I don't believe that it was because of the numerous people giving them support.
They had all of that support before the case was shelved, they could easily have said there was no more that could be done now that the PJ had shelved the case.
Instead they hired private detectives and petitioned for a review of the case.
-
Was the book her idea or someone else's? I don't know. I do know the deciding factor was money because she said so.
Was it their idea to petition the government? I don't know. I do think they wanted the Portuguese investigation completely discredited. Hence the request for a review, not an investigation. Had they gone into obscurity they would have been forever suspects.
That's not right G-Unit, the McCann's had always said they wanted an investigation as a matter of fact Gerry said it in the Leveson inquiry and that's on video.
-
If the test is boiled down to continue searching v stop searching, then I would have continued searching.
Beyond that, the list of things I would have done differently is too long to itemise. The de-emphasis of Smithman from when he emerged to the current time is shocking, to put it mildly.
The McCann's made it very clear that Smithman was important, Kate wrote about him in her book too.
-
That's not right G-Unit, the McCann's had always said they wanted an investigation as a matter of fact Gerry said it in the Leveson inquiry and that's on video.
the idea that the mccanns wanted a review and not an investigation is another sceptic myth
-
Was the book her idea or someone else's? I don't know. I do know the deciding factor was money because she said so.
Was it their idea to petition the government? I don't know. I do think they wanted the Portuguese investigation completely discredited. Hence the request for a review, not an investigation. Had they gone into obscurity they would have been forever suspects.
The deciding factor was raising money for the Madeleine Fund. No one put a gun to her head to write it. If it wasn't the McCanns' idea to petition the government then whose idea do you think it was? They didn't have to do it, and the Portuguese investigation had already been thoroughly discredited in the media long before the review even began so your mooted motive doesn't hold water I'm afraid. And finally - they are forever suspects as far as the "sceptic" community is concerned whether they'd gone into obscurity or not, as we can plainly see both here and elsewhere on the net.
-
the idea that the mccanns wanted a review and not an investigation is another sceptic myth
Yes, what do "sceptics" imagine would have been the point of the government agreeing to push for a review that did not lead to the case being re-opened or at least some further positive action required?
-
Why has no "sceptic" yet agreed that it would have been far better for everyone if the McCanns had just slinked (slunk?) away under a stone once the initial investigation was shelved? Surely from all the criticism you "sceptics" have for their nauseating media performances since then, the vast and profligate spending of taxpayers' cash by the government on the review and reinvestigation, the "Barbara Cartland-esque" novel that makes you sick to read etc, the evil bullying lawsuit against the poor wronged ex-cop, surely you must agree that your lives would have been hugely enhanced if the McCanns had faded away into obscurity and not taken part in any of these repugnant activities over the last 7 years?
-
Why has no "sceptic" yet agreed that it would have been far better for everyone if the McCanns had just slinked (slunk?) away under a stone once the initial investigation was shelved? Surely from all the criticism you "sceptics" have for their nauseating media performances since then, the vast and profligate spending of taxpayers' cash by the government on the review and reinvestigation, the "Barbara Cartland-esque" novel that makes you sick to read etc, the evil bullying lawsuit against the poor wronged ex-cop, surely you must agree that your lives would have been hugely enhanced if the McCanns had faded away into obscurity and not taken part in any of these repugnant activities over the last 7 years?
Yes!
In the immediate wake of Madeleine's abduction, I do recall some sceptics confidently predicting that the McCanns would crawl away anonymously into the woodwork, never to be seen or heard of again.
When that didn't happen, all the criticism was of their efforts to keep the investigation open and keep Madeleine's profile in the public eye high.
There's just no pleasing some folk ....
-
Yes!
In the immediate wake of Madeleine's abduction, I do recall some sceptics confidently predicting that the McCanns would crawl away anonymously into the woodwork, never to be seen or heard of again.
When that didn't happen, all the criticism was of their efforts to keep the investigation open and keep Madeleine's profile in the public eye high.
There's just no pleasing some folk ....
What abduction ferryman ?
Keep to the proved facts.
Abduction isn't.
-
What abduction ferryman ?
Keep to the proved facts.
Abduction isn't.
In your opinion.
-
In your opinion.
No. So pray tell me where is the proof of abduction.
I await your answer.
-
No. So pray tell me where is the proof of abduction.
I await your answer.
I am not obliged to give an answer to your opinion.
-
No. So pray tell me where is the proof of abduction.
I await your answer.
Nowhere, and if there was, none of us would be here arguing the toss
-
I am not obliged to give an answer to your opinion.
Since you know as well as I do, there is no proof of abduction.
-
What abduction ferryman ?
Keep to the proved facts.
Abduction isn't.
99% of what is posted on here is not proven......shall we all just stick to proven facts now
-
No, I don't believe that it was because of the numerous people giving them support.
They had all of that support before the case was shelved, they could easily have said there was no more that could be done now that the PJ had shelved the case.
Instead they hired private detectives and petitioned for a review of the case.
it never takes long for the word 'belief' to enter the discussion. You may believe, but a belief isn't knowledge. You don't know who drove the process. It may have been the McCanns it may not. Brian Kennedy was instrumental in the hiring of Private Detectives, he paid part of their fees. it would have been churlish to say 'No thanks, we're going home now'. There was also a fund full of money which had to be justified. They could easily have asked for the PJ to keep on investigating, but they didn't. As I said, they asked for a review, not for a new investigation.
-
The McCann's made it very clear that Smithman was important, Kate wrote about him in her book too.
They mentioned him "in passing" a couple of times, and they never gave him the importance SY did post Crimewatch...you would have to search very very hard to fnd any reference to him on their website or on Facebook - this is a fact
Meanwhile some anonymous witness could couldn't be bothered to come forward for two years who overheard a conversation in Spain of some woman allegedly talking about a new daughter was given a full blown news conference, purleese
-
No, I don't believe that it was because of the numerous people giving them support.
They had all of that support before the case was shelved, they could easily have said there was no more that could be done now that the PJ had shelved the case.
Instead they hired private detectives and petitioned for a review of the case.
Just to be exact they hired private detectives almost a year before the case was shelved and had foreseen/planned they might do so only two weeks after 3 may
-
it never takes long for the word 'belief' to enter the discussion. You may believe, but a belief isn't knowledge. You don't know who drove the process. It may have been the McCanns it may not. Brian Kennedy was instrumental in the hiring of Private Detectives, he paid part of their fees. it would have been churlish to say 'No thanks, we're going home now'. There was also a fund full of money which had to be justified. They could easily have asked for the PJ to keep on investigating, but they didn't. As I said, they asked for a review, not for a new investigation.
they could only ask for a review...a new investigation could only be launched with new evidence...it seems new evidence has been found
-
Why has no "sceptic" yet agreed that it would have been far better for everyone if the McCanns had just slinked (slunk?) away under a stone once the initial investigation was shelved? Surely from all the criticism you "sceptics" have for their nauseating media performances since then, the vast and profligate spending of taxpayers' cash by the government on the review and reinvestigation, the "Barbara Cartland-esque" novel that makes you sick to read etc, the evil bullying lawsuit against the poor wronged ex-cop, surely you must agree that your lives would have been hugely enhanced if the McCanns had faded away into obscurity and not taken part in any of these repugnant activities over the last 7 years?
Is attacking sceptics the reason for this thread?
-
Is attacking sceptics the reason for this thread?
Yup.
-
Yup.
I thought it was just Alf doing his Shavian bit again.
-
Is attacking sceptics the reason for this thread?
Of course, it was made clear from the opening sardonic come inherently dishonest by obvious nature post, surprised it was allowed TBH...
-
I thought it was just Alf doing his Shavian bit again.
Need to google shavian
-
It seems that despite the constant criticism levelled at the McCanns supposed self-publicity campaign and determination to keep their child's case in the news and focus of attention, no one is quite prepared to state that things would have been a lot better if the McCanns had simply shut up and b....red off the scene years ago. How curious.... &%+((£
-
It seems that despite the constant criticism levelled at the McCanns supposed self-publicity campaign and determination to keep their child's case in the news and focus of attention, no one is quite prepared to state that things would have been a lot better if the McCanns had simply shut up and b....red off the scene years ago. How curious.... &%+((£
Why would any sane person respond to your insane post lol thnk about it troll goading chuck
8((()*/"
I have you on ignore and don't respond to insanity in principle but saw that quoted and gosh your post made me comment, soz about that, Carry on trolling though.....and ENJOY
-
Which of the following phrases from my earlier post about the McCanns would forum sceptics view as hyperbole?
"nauseating media performances"
"the vast and profligate spending of taxpayers' cash by the government on the review and reinvestigation"
"the "Barbara Cartland-esque" novel that makes you sick to read" (Kate's book)
"the evil bullying lawsuit against the poor wronged ex-cop"
surely you must agree that your lives would have been hugely enhanced if the McCanns had faded away into obscurity and not taken part in any of these "repugnant activities" over the last 7 years?
-
The McCann's made it very clear that Smithman was important, Kate wrote about him in her book too.
She did indeed write about him in her 2011 book. It's just that the 2008 e-fit is not in the 2011 book and it's not on the Portuguese page of their site.
Note to self. Although I have stuck up the transcript of Crimewatch 2013 in full on my blog, plus in simple English, and in Portuguese on my blog, I still need to edit and change re e-fits and contact details.
-
She did indeed write about him in her 2011 book. It's just that the 2008 e-fit is not in the 2011 book and it's not on the Portuguese page of their site.
Note to self. Although I have stuck up the transcript of Crimewatch 2013 in full on my blog, plus in simple English, and in Portuguese on my blog, I still need to edit and change re e-fits and contact details.
Smthman efit was nowhere to be seen from when the Mccanns had it to today....apart from a few parts which were soon scrubbed over and never ever publicised
-
From OP :
'Would it have been better all round if the McCanns had drawn a line under Madeleine's disappearance years ago, not bothered writing a book themselves, not lobbied for a case review, withdrawn completely from the media and quietly applied for a Presumption of Death certificate seven years after her disappearance?'
If their raison d'etre was the successful recovery of their daughter it would have made no difference either way.
-
From OP :
'Would it have been better all round if the McCanns had drawn a line under Madeleine's disappearance years ago, not bothered writing a book themselves, not lobbied for a case review, withdrawn completely from the media and quietly applied for a Presumption of Death certificate seven years after her disappearance?'
If their raison d'etre was the successful recovery of their daughter it would have made no difference either way.
???
-
Which of the following phrases from my earlier post about the McCanns would forum sceptics view as hyperbole?
"nauseating media performances"
"the vast and profligate spending of taxpayers' cash by the government on the review and reinvestigation"
"the "Barbara Cartland-esque" novel that makes you sick to read" (Kate's book)
"the evil bullying lawsuit against the poor wronged ex-cop"
surely you must agree that your lives would have been hugely enhanced if the McCanns had faded away into obscurity and not taken part in any of these "repugnant activities" over the last 7 years?
All of it.
-
???
You said would it have been better all round if a,b and c. I said it would have made no difference. The McCanns would still be seen by a large percentage of the population as neglectful parents and Madeleine would still be missing.
-
All of it.
That's in your opinion, there are others on this forum who have expressed very similar sentiments to the ones I have written - Mercury, Angelo and Stephen are three who spring to mind.
-
You said would it have been better all round if a,b and c. I said it would have made no difference. The McCanns would still be seen by a large percentage of the population as neglectful parents and Madeleine would still be missing.
What percentage? Please provide a cite.
I think actually it would have made a difference. I think without the fuel that the book, the media campaign, the review, the reinvestigation etc, I think most people who currently regularly post about the case would have lost interest long ago. Let's face it - "sceptics" who moan about the McCanns' actions day in, day out actually thrive upon them and have derived an enormous amount of entertainment from them over the years. Where would they be without them?
-
What percentage? Please provide a cite.
I think actually it would have made a difference. I think without the fuel that the book, the media campaign, the review, the reinvestigation etc, I think most people who currently regularly post about the case would have lost interest long ago. Let's face it - "sceptics" who moan about the McCanns' actions day in, day out actually thrive upon them and have derived an enormous amount of entertainment from them over the years. Where would they be without them?
And just think of all the man hours that you could have devoted to your 'business' instead of berating the sceptics for their lack of moral fibre here day in, day out !
-
And just think of all the man hours that you could have devoted to your 'business' instead of berating the sceptics for their lack of moral fibre here day in, day out !
It's true, and the same goes for you. Had the McCanns faded away into obscurity you might have found better things to do with your time than make snide comments about them and their supporters day in day out, correct? You might even be a master sashimi chef by now!
-
So many of us got involved because we were shocked and horrified by what was being done to The McCann, never dreaming that it would still be going on eight years later.
-
The mccanns and no one else are responsible for what they failed to do.
This thread merely reflects what has happened so many times in the last 8 years, namely the mccanns through their limited band of supporters, doing the blame game.
The mccanns are not the victims, Madeleine was, and anyone with a clear view of the case can see that.
-
Ultimately The McCann Sceptics have helped to keep this case in the spotlight. They have motivated me and others to defend The McCanns and The Rule of law. I wonder how they feel about that?
Their so called research and bad mouthing of The McCanns is never going to get The McCanns arrested, and I doubt that they have done anything to help Madeleine, which is what they profess to be doing in the process of proving her dead, which they haven't done either.
-
The mccanns and no one else are responsible for what they failed to do.
This thread merely reflects what has happened so many times in the last 8 years, namely the mccanns through their limited band of supporters, doing the blame game.
The mccanns are not the victims, Madeleine was, and anyone with a clear view of the case can see that.
Roughly how many times do you think you have expressed the above statement over the last 8 years, and roughly how many more times do you think you will find it necessary to write it before you die? Just curious...
-
Roughly how many times do you think you have expressed the above statement over the last 8 years, and roughly how many more times do you think you will find it necessary to write it before you die? Just curious...
and how many times do we have to hear the 'poor mccann' act from people such as you ?
Just curious. 8)--))
-
and how many times do we have to hear the 'poor mccann' act from people such as you ?
Just curious. 8)--))
For as long as it takes.
-
and how many times do we have to hear the 'poor mccann' act from people such as you ?
Just curious. 8)--))
At least I make an attempt to look at things from a different angle and don't repeat myself ad nauseam. Do you think if all us supporters shut up completely and went away forever that you would stop your pompous proclamations about the 'neglectful' McCanns or would you still feel motivated to state such a thing every day if you knew you were only preaching to the converted?
-
At least I make an attempt to look at things from a different angle and don't repeat myself ad nauseam. Do you think if all us supporters shut up completely and went away forever that you would stop your pompous proclamations about the 'neglectful' McCanns or would you still feel motivated to state such a thing every day if you knew you were only preaching to the converted?
Don't make me laugh.
You have one default position, DEFEND THE MCCANNS AND SUPPORT THE ABDUCTION SCENARIO.
As to pompous alfred, that oozes from your every post.
-
For as long as it takes.
We know. 8**8:/:
-
We know. 8**8:/:
Nothing if not a stoic with stamina I am, Stephen. A bit like you. Such a pity we don't agree.
-
Don't make me laugh.
You have one default position, DEFEND THE MCCANNS AND SUPPORT THE ABDUCTION SCENARIO.
As to pompous alfred, that oozes from your every post.
Would you like me, Eleanor and everyone else who DEFENDS THE MCCANNS AND SUPPORTS THE ABDUCTION SCENARIO to go away? That wouldn't be much fun for you would it?
-
Would you like me, Eleanor and everyone else who DEFENDS THE MCCANNS AND SUPPORTS THE ABDUCTION SCENARIO to go away? That wouldn't be much fun for you would it?
2 halves of the same coin alfred.
Remember, I have given the offer on numerous occasions to mccann supporters, don't spout abduction as fact, and I won't do the reverse.
-
2 halves of the same coin alfred.
Remember, I have given the offer on numerous occasions to mccann supporters, don't spout abduction as fact, and I won't do the reverse.
But then I wouldn't have anything to do when not watching paint dry, and nor would you. And let's face it, we are one, big happy family really. No one actually hates anyone. Do they?
-
2 halves of the same coin alfred.
Remember, I have given the offer on numerous occasions to mccann supporters, don't spout abduction as fact, and I won't do the reverse.
When have I (or anyone else on this board for that matter) "spouted" that abduction is a fact? I have repeatedly said that IMO (and it seems that of the Met) it is the most plausible scenario, why does this upset you so?
-
But then I wouldn't have anything to do when not watching paint dry, and nor would you. And let's face it, we are one, big happy family really. No one actually hates anyone. Do they?
ERm...I don't think Mercury likes me very much, judging by the names she was calling me yesterday... 8)><(
-
When have I (or anyone else on this board for that matter) "spouted" that abduction is a fact? I have repeatedly said that IMO (and it seems that of the Met) it is the most plausible scenario, why does this upset you so?
You type as per usual from a false premise.
I am not upset in the slightest.
Well, the most 'plausible scenario' has yielded nothing.
How about another plausible scenario ?
-
But then I wouldn't have anything to do when not watching paint dry, and nor would you. And let's face it, we are one, big happy family really. No one actually hates anyone. Do they?
Well apart from Tutoring, running an agency, preparing Court cases, and a few other things.
Not much. 8(0(*
-
Ultimately The McCann Sceptics have helped to keep this case in the spotlight. They have motivated me and others to defend The McCanns and The Rule of law. I wonder how they feel about that?
Their so called research and bad mouthing of The McCanns is never going to get The McCanns arrested, and I doubt that they have done anything to help Madeleine, which is what they profess to be doing in the process of proving her dead, which they haven't done either.
Agreed nothing anyone says on social media will get the McCanns arrested but, as history has shown us, it certainly keeps them on their toes.
-
You type as per usual from a false premise.
I am not upset in the slightest.
Well, the most 'plausible scenario' has yielded nothing.
How about another plausible scenario ?
The reason why I asked you why you get so upset by the A word, is that you're constantly rallying against it, as if it's anathema to you, as if the very mention of the word offends you deeply, to the point where you feel it neccessary to broker a deal whereby if I won't state it as fact (a false premise if ever there was one) then you won't keep going on with your mantra! It is (IMO) the only plausible scenario, despite the fact that it has not been proven, I don't have another plausible scenario and have been waiting 8 years to hear one.
-
Agreed nothing anyone says on social media will get the McCanns arrested but, as history has shown us, it certainly keeps them on their toes.
Can you explain what you mean here?
-
The reason why I asked you why you get so upset by the A word, is that you're constantly rallying against it, as if it's anathema to you, as if the very mention of the word offends you deeply, to the point where you feel it neccessary to broker a deal whereby if I won't state it as fact (a false premise if ever there was one) then you won't keep going on with your mantra! It is (IMO) the only plausible scenario, despite the fact that it has not been proven, I don't have another plausible scenario and have been waiting 8 years to hear one.
There in your response lies the key.
'IMO'
You aren't going to say anything else, are you.
-
There in your response lies the key.
'IMO'
You aren't going to say anything else, are you.
It goes without saying that all the views I express on this forum are my opinion, but if it helps I will preface all future posts with IMO.
-
It goes without saying that all the views I express on this forum are my opinion, but if it helps I will preface all future posts with IMO.
Aye. 8((()*/
-
Can you explain what you mean here?
Well I could Alfie but then you'd just question my viewpoint and we'd bat it back and forward until we were both bored rigid and I'm sure you'll agree that there's better things we could both be doing.
-
Well I could Alfie but then you'd just question my viewpoint and we'd bat it back and forward until we were both bored rigid and I'm sure you'll agree that there's better things we could both be doing.
I thought that's how discussion forums worked?
If you have better things to be doing then why bother with making posts at all?
PS: Your posts never bore me.... 8)--))