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: mercury on June 14, 2015, 01:28:19 AM
-
Simple question, its an affront to do so, its an attack, its bullying, its emotional blackmail, its a threat to sue, how worse can it get? Well I shant include accusations of being a paedophile for just not believing the mccanns story as they come from some fanatical mccann supporters, one or two are on here but thankfully most arent, discuss
-
Simple question, its an affront to do so, its an attack, its bullying, its emotional blackmail, its a threat to sue, how worse can it get? Well I shant include accusations of being a paedophile for just not believing the mccanns story as they come from fanatical mccann supporters, one or teo are on here but thankfully most arent, discuss
I think you will find that everyone has their own agenda, some call it playing games while others are considered fanatical in the extreme.
We here have attempted to provide an environment where almost everyone can have their say, be frank and take part in constructive discussion and debate. With the best will in the world, there will always be moments when this falls apart but then, that is why we have moderators and editors who espouse different viewpoints.
A forum is only as good as its members, all its members. Every single poster brings something to the table at some time or other and for that we can all be thankful. Argue certainly and promote your own views but do it gracefully, that is all anyone can ask!
Thanks again to all members and of course the mods/editors for making this forum one to be proud of!
-
its a good? mercury and if we try and defend ourselves we are attacked or our posts are deleted yet worse are allowed to stay why??
-
I think the absence of any logical argument from some who profess to doubt the McCanns is attacked.
But that is quite different from attacking the poster.
-
I think the absence of any logical argument from some who profess to doubt the McCanns is attacked.
But that is quite different from attacking the poster.
people have the right toa opinion why should people control what others think? is having a diffrent opinion so wrong?? people do not need to tell others what to think and mcann supporters are big in doing this
-
I think you will find that everyone has their own agenda, some call it playing games while others are considered fanatical in the extreme.
We here have attempted to provide an environment where almost everyone can have their say, be frank and take part in constructive discussion and debate. With the best will in the world, there will always be moments when this falls apart but then, that is why we have moderators and editors who espouse different viewpoints.
A forum is only as good as its members, all its members. Every single poster brings something to the table at some time or other and for that we can all be thankful. Argue certainly and promote your own views but do it gracefully, that is all anyone can ask!
Thanks again to all members and of course the mods/editors for making this forum one to be proud of!
well saod john but one must be careful of overmoderating too some of that goes on here and it seems like it is censorship imo
-
its a good? mercury and if we try and defend ourselves we are attacked or our posts are deleted yet worse are allowed to stay why??
All posts which breach the forum rules are removed on sight regardless of who makes them. The best advice for anyone who feels under threat of attack is to report the offending comment immediately and let the staff deal with it. Under no circumstances should a member respond to an attack as this extends the issue.
There is a buddy and an ignore function within the forum for members to use.
Go to Profile then Buddies/Ignore list.
-
people have the right toa opinion why should people control what others think? is having a diffrent opinion so wrong??
True. However your opinion is supposed to be about the case - and not confined to slagging off, abusing and goading other posters.
-
people have the right toa opinion why should people control what others think? is having a diffrent opinion so wrong?? people do not need to tell others what to think and mcann supporters are big in doing this
Depends!
I should emphasise, underline and stress that I am not!
But suppose I were of the opinion that anyone black should be burnt at the stake.
Would I be entitled to express it?
I (sincerely!) hope I wouldn't.
-
Depends!
I should emphasise, underline and stress that I am not!
But suppose I were of the opinion that anyone black should be burnt at the stake.
Would I be entitled to express it?
I (sincerely!) hope I wouldn't.
... And there you have an unsubtle attempt to equate doubts in this case with a racist mindset.
-
Simple question, its an affront to do so, its an attack, its bullying, its emotional blackmail, its a threat to sue, how worse can it get? Well I shant include accusations of being a paedophile for just not believing the mccanns story as they come from fanatical mccann supporters, one or teo are on here but thankfully most arent, discuss
I have been called a paedophile and paedophile supporter more times than I care to remember. I have also been called a troll, a child neglect supporter and other names besides, a sheep, a member of The Faithful (Faithlilly's fave!) What is your point again...?
-
I have been called a paedophile and paedophile supporter more times than I care to remember. I have also been called a troll, a child neglect supporter and other names besides, a sheep, a member of The Faithful (Faithlilly's fave!) What is your point again...?
you have a very agressive posting manner imo you get quite hostile
-
I see occasional goading on both sides. People who support the McCanns are also attacked (despite the thread title).
Why not simply critique the post as opposed to the poster?
-
you have a very agressive posting manner imo you get quite hostile
Oh dear, I do apologise.
-
I have been ignoring the originator of this thread for quite some time. I have found her posting style aggressive, abusive and on occasion just downright nasty.
-
I have been ignoring the originator of this thread for quite some time. I have found her posting style aggressive, abusive and on occasion just downright nasty.
Very funny.
-
I have been ignoring the originator of this thread for quite some time. I have found her posting style aggressive, abusive and on occasion just downright nasty.
It's kind of ironic that an OP bemoaning the attacking behaviour of McCann supporters also includes a direct insult to us supporters, that some of us here are both imbecilic and insane. The thing is - this OP had to be approved by the Admin of this forum, a decision that I find hard to fathom.
-
Very funny.
Irony, even @)(++(*
-
I think the absence of any logical argument from some who profess to doubt the McCanns is attacked.
But that is quite different from attacking the poster.
Logical arguments ferryman ?
You can't accept them, and we know the reason why.
You are here to defend the mccanns, as your history of posting more than indicates.
P.S. Before you say it, I know you're not paid. 8(0(*
-
Logical arguments ferryman ?
You can't accept them, and we know the reason why.
You are to defend the mccanns, as your history of posting more than indicates.
P.S. Before you say it, I know you're not paid. 8(0(*
its the same with some other well known mcann supporters they are all passive aggresive imo they bully otehrs because people see though the mcanns decit brietta tried to excuse them by saying they are drs etc it doesnt work
-
its the same with some other well known mcann supporters they are all passive aggresive imo
Indeed they are Carlymichelle, and their tactics are well known.
-
Logical arguments ferryman ?
You can't accept them, and we know the reason why.
You are here to defend the mccanns, as your history of posting more than indicates.
P.S. Before you say it, I know you're not paid. 8(0(*
As the thread title is currently phrased, is that OT?
-
As the thread title is currently phrased, is that OT?
It seems that a thread bemoaning attacks is now turning into an attack on others. Nice one Admin.
-
As the thread title is currently phrased, is that OT?
so what if it s OT? this forum is so controlled most other forums let debate etc flow freely mcann supporters dont like that
-
As the thread title is currently phrased, is that OT?
Mere observation Carana and analysis of pro-mccann sites.
-
Mere observation Carana and analysis of pro-mccann sites.
the way i see things stephen is the mcanns started this whole thing by their sheer neglect of thei children parents have had their children taken into care for way less the mcanns lost any credibility or sympathy they think they deserve by leaving 3 precious little children alone and leaving maddie to her fate
-
so what if it s OT? this forum is so controlled most other forums let debate etc flow freely mcann supporters dont like that
Carly, You're not trying to goad, are you?
If and when you debate a point concerning the case, I'll be happy to respond. I may even agree with a point or two, or disagree, depending on what it is and provided that the point in question isn't the same one raised day after day.
-
its the same with some other well known mcann supporters they are all passive aggresive imo they bully otehrs because people see though the mcanns decit brietta tried to excuse them by saying they are drs etc it doesnt work
This is another poster I most often choose to ignore, mainly because her posts as well as being ill informed are just too silly for words.
On this occasion it would be worth while pondering why I am being attacked because I refer to Dr Kate and Dr Gerry McCann by their title on most occasions.
-
This is another poster I most often choose to ignore, mainly because her posts as well as being ill informed are just too silly for words.
On this occasion it would be worth while pondering why I am being attacked because I refer to Dr Kate and Dr Gerry McCann by their title on most occasions.
Well kate is no longer operating, and if I remember correctly, consultants are called Mr., not doctor.
and of course kate is not on the specialist register either.
-
Mere observation Carana and analysis of pro-mccann sites.
Would a separate thread "Why is anyone who isn't convinced of the mccannswhatdunnit theory attacked" be a worthwhile exercise? I doubt it - just more work for the mods. I'd have thought it simpler to modify the title.
-
Well kate is no longer operating, and if I remember correctly, consultants are called Mr., not doctor.
and of course kate is not on the specialist register either.
Incorrect stephen.
Physician consultants are called Dr.
Gerry is a physician Consultant, so is called Dr.
Surgeons, on the other hand, are called Mr.
-
Incorrect stephen.
Physician consultants are called Dr.
Gerry is a physician Consultant, so is called Dr.
Surgeons, on the other hand, are called Mr.
I'll have to take your word for that.
However, kate healy is not on the specialist register, is she ?
-
because they attack the mccanns
-
because they attack the mccanns
the mcanns are adults they can defend themselves they dont need you to they care none about you
-
The supporter's of the McCanns have very few facts to work with.
Those who doubt the McCanns have a lot of material to support their case. Their posts are based on many facts.
That's why those who suspect or disbelieve the McCanns are attacked. They post facts which are in the files or taken from videos of interviews. The only way to answer them is either by using opinion, (which is no use as it's subjective) or to attack the credibility of the poster.
-
The supporter's of the McCanns have very few facts to work with.
Those who doubt the McCanns have a lot of material to support their case. Their posts are based on many facts.
That's why those who suspect or disbelieve the McCanns are attacked. They post facts which are in the files or taken from videos of interviews. The only way to answer them is either by using opinion, (which is no use as it's subjective) or to attack the credibility of the poster.
exactly so they have nothing left but to attack the poster not the opinion
-
The supporter's of the McCanns have very few facts to work with.
Those who doubt the McCanns have a lot of material to support their case. Their posts are based on many facts.
That's why those who suspect or disbelieve the McCanns are attacked. They post facts which are in the files or taken from videos of interviews. The only way to answer them is either by using opinion, (which is no use as it's subjective) or to attack the credibility of the poster.
So basically you're saying that the McCann doubters have won the argument. @)(++(*
Here's a fact for you - the Met are treating Madeleine's disappearance as a stranger abduction. I can provide a cite to confirm my statement. Now provide a fact which proves that they are not. Off you go.
-
So basically you're saying that the McCann doubters have won the argument. @)(++(*
Here's a fact for you - the Met are treating Madeleine's disappearance as a stranger abduction. I can provide a cite to confirm my statement. Now provide a fact which proves that they are not. Off you go.
Ah ha! Here comes Alfred's fact. Give us your cite then.
-
Ah ha! Here comes Alfred's fact. Give us your cite then.
You know full well that I can provide a cite for my statement. It was my signature line for long enough. Now provide me with one fact that proves I am wrong. It should be easy for you, now off you go.
-
You know full well that I can provide a cite for my statement. It was my signature line for long enough. Now provide me with one fact that proves I am wrong. It should be easy for you, now off you go.
No no no. You offered a cite now give it. (I don't read signature lines)
-
In fact G-Unit, please also provide one fact about Operation Grange which proves that the McCanns are in the frame for their child's disappearance.
-
No no no. You offered a cite now give it. (I don't read signature lines)
OK, I'll play your game. Here's one. Given time I can also supply video footage of him actually uttering these words.
Dismissing conspiracy theories about Madeleine's parents' involvement, Redwood said he believed the girl's disappearance was the result of "a criminal act by a stranger". http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call
Now, that is a fact, which you can choose to disbelieve but which you are completely unable to disprove.
-
A belief isn`t a fact, is it?
-
OK, I'll play your game. Here's one. Given time I can also supply video footage of him actually uttering these words.
Dismissing conspiracy theories about Madeleine's parents' involvement, Redwood said he believed the girl's disappearance was the result of "a criminal act by a stranger". http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call
Now, that is a fact, which you can choose to disbelieve but which you are completely unable to disprove.
Your game not mine. That's one fact, well done! I believe Redwood said he 'believed'. That doesn't mean he was right, of course, he was just giving his opinion with nothing to support it ever having been released in the following three years.
-
A belief isn`t a fact, is it?
The fact is that the Met have said they believe Madeleine's disappearance was due to a criminal act by a stranger. Now, like I said you can choose to disbelieve what the Met have said but you cannot prove that they are investigating any other theory than what they have stated, can you?
-
Your game not mine. That's one fact, well done! I believe Redwood said he 'believed'. That doesn't mean he was right, of course, he was just giving his opinion with nothing to support it ever having been released in the following three years.
Here's another fact. A number of people were made arguidos in this case last year. Not one of them was a McCann or anyone who was on holiday with them in May 2007. This is strong supporting evidence to back up the Met's statement that Madeleine's disappearance was due to a criminal act by a stranger, and also to their statement that neither the McCanns nor any of their friends is suspected of involvement.
-
Has Operation Grange made any pronouncement this year, or are we still relying on old information ?
-
Has Operation Grange made any pronouncement this year, or are we still relying on old information ?
They have made no announcement about anything, so we can only go by what they have said in the past. Let's deal in facts and not conjecture.
-
Well I have come up against the opposite, I have always been attacked for supporting the McCann's.
The only time I 'attack' anti McCann and I wouldn't call it attack I would call it debate, is when I think what they post is not factual or true.
-
Well I have come up against the opposite, I have always been attacked for supporting the McCann's.
The only time I 'attack' anti McCann and I wouldn't call it attack I would call it debate, is when I think what they post is not factual or true.
What happened?
-
What happened?
Well basically getting called disgusting names such as P...o, I can't put the rest down as they are so disgusting. Trying to find out who I am threatening to know who I am and that I would be dealt with. Bringing my children into it saying nasty things about them the list goes on Carew.
-
Well basically getting called disgusting names such as P...o, I can't put the rest down as they are so disgusting. Trying to find out who I am threatening to know who I am and that I would be dealt with. Bringing my children into it saying nasty things about them the list goes on Carew.
But not on here?
-
But not on here?
No, not on here. I don't go there anymore, why subject myself to that sort of thing. It's a relief to be able to debate without having that sort of abuse every time.
-
No, not on here. I don't go there anymore, why subject myself to that sort of thing. It's a relief to be able to debate without having that sort of abuse every time.
The problem is both sides bring activities elsewhere into the debate here which doesn't add to the discussion.
-
The problem is both sides bring activities elsewhere into the debate here which doesn't add to the discussion.
What is this thread doing here then? why are McCann supporters on this forum being accused by the Admin-sanctioned OP of being insane and imbecilic? It's a disgrace!
-
Well basically getting called disgusting names such as P...o, I can't put the rest down as they are so disgusting. Trying to find out who I am threatening to know who I am and that I would be dealt with. Bringing my children into it saying nasty things about them the list goes on Carew.
I thought you meant on here.
-
I think you will find that everyone has their own agenda, some call it playing games while others are considered fanatical in the extreme.
We here have attempted to provide an environment where almost everyone can have their say, be frank and take part in constructive discussion and debate. With the best will in the world, there will always be moments when this falls apart but then, that is why we have moderators and editors who espouse different viewpoints.
A forum is only as good as its members, all its members. Every single poster brings something to the table at some time or other and for that we can all be thankful. Argue certainly and promote your own views but do it gracefully, that is all anyone can ask!
Thanks again to all members and of course the mods/editors for making this forum one to be proud of!
Can you please explain why a thread has been allowed to be started which includes an assertion that some McCann supporters on this forum are insane and imbecilic? How does that fit in with the ethos of the forum? Also could you please explain why this forum follows a troll on twitter like @Phattphilly who regularly tweets absolutely vile rubbish like the following:
Phattphilly @phattphilly · 6 hrs6 hours ago
I hope k #mccann gets hit by a car or bus, even better a truck! f..king vile parasite #McCann
Phattphilly @phattphilly · May 31
Go jump on your bike k #mccann break a leg,neck,anything!Legal Defence for Goncalo Amaral http://www.gofundme.com/Legal-DefencePJGA?pc=14_tw_1 …
Phattphilly @phattphilly · May 3
OMG "MADELEINE WAS HERE" JUST CAME ON THE C.I CHANNEL! Cannot bear the sound of their voices! f..king murdering c..tS #mccann CHANEL CHANGED
-
The fact is that the Met have said they believe Madeleine's disappearance was due to a criminal act by a stranger. Now, like I said you can choose to disbelieve what the Met have said but you cannot prove that they are investigating any other theory than what they have stated, can you?
Merely a belief.
A belief, not even knowing the crime.
Hardly good police work.
-
Can you please explain why a thread has been allowed to be started which includes an assertion that some McCann supporters on this forum are insane and imbecilic? How does that fit in with the ethos of the forum? Also could you please explain why this forum follows a troll on twitter like @Phattphilly who regularly tweets absolutely vile rubbish like the following:
I am appalled that we are 'following' a person like that ... I don't 'do' twitter but I certainly don't want to be associated with @Phattphilly or anyone like her.
I am also less than happy with this thread.
Who decided that "people who suspect the McCanns are attacked"? ... and who is attacking them?
-
The problem is both sides bring activities elsewhere into the debate here which doesn't add to the discussion.
I'm sorry I didn't realise the thread meant being attacked on this forum and not on other debate forums too.
-
I'm sorry I didn't realise the thread meant being attacked on this forum and not on other debate forums too.
I also believed, that it was referring to "Why are People who suspect the McCanns attacked" wherever one may be posting. It doesn't say...on this forum.
After all I am sure a lot of our members also post elsewhere.
However I am sure that Admin will correct me if I am wrong.
-
I also believed, that it was referring to "Why are People who suspect the McCanns attacked" wherever one may be posting. It doesn't say...on this forum.
After all I am sure a lot of our members also post elsewhere.
However I am sure that Admin will correct me if I am wrong.
Not bloody likely. This is supposed to be one of the more sane fora..................... guess the rest.
-
Not bloody likely. This is supposed to be one of the more sane fora..................... guess the rest.
I am glad to hear that you stick with us(if that is what your puzzle meant) but many have discussed other forums that they use, so they must surely post in them?
-
I am glad to hear that you stick with us(if that is what your puzzle meant) but many have discussed other forums that they use, so they must surely post in them?
I guess they do. I don't. Like if this site is one of the more sane what are the rest like?
I have to confess to looking over the fence at "Ol' Eye Patch" on one occasion. Jeez man reach for the M16 "lock and load" 8(0(*
That should get a screen grab and fatwa !
-
I guess they do. I don't. Like if this site is one of the more sane what are the rest like?
I have to confess to looking over the fence at "Ol' Eye Patch" on one occasion. Jeez man reach for the M16 "lock and load" 8(0(*
That should get a screen grab and fatwa !
Oh my goodness! Alice. Who is this “Old Eye patch”? Is he someone being attacked because he suspects the McCanns?
We do try to keep it as sane as is humanly possible on this site, but it gets mighty difficult at times.
-
Oh my goodness! Alice. Who is this “Old Eye patch”? Is he someone being attacked because he suspects the McCanns?
We do try to keep it as sane as is humanly possible on this site, but it gets mighty difficult at times.
You can say that again.
-
Oh my goodness! Alice. Who is this “Old Eye patch”? Is he someone being attacked because he suspects the McCanns?
We do try to keep it as sane as is humanly possible on this site, but it gets mighty difficult at times.
On another site. Avatar is a Bond Villain with an eye patch. Named after a cute little Jack Russell in "Midsommer Murders".
-
On another site. Avatar is a Bond Villain with an eye patch. Named after a cute little Jack Russell in "Midsommer Murders".
Thank you, Alice.
-
You can say that again.
It is very difficult, Eleanor.
There is no pleasing some on any forum, I should imagine, so we are no different, except for our strict moderating.
However, some want to attack, insult, goad, abuse and expect their posts to be left intact, while they insist others posts should be deleted, for much less offensive posts. Sane???? £5%4%
-
It is very difficult, Eleanor.
There is no pleasing some on any forum, I should imagine, so we are no different, except for our strict moderating.
However, some want to attack, insult, goad, abuse and expect their posts to be left intact, while they insist others posts should be deleted, for much less offensive posts. Sane???? £5%4%
And that's just the mods 8(0(*
-
It is very difficult, Eleanor.
There is no pleasing some on any forum, I should imagine, so we are no different, except for our strict moderating.
However, some want to attack, insult, goad, abuse and expect their posts to be left intact, while they insist others posts should be deleted, for much less offensive posts. Sane???? £5%4%
Onwards, ever onwards, Anna.
-
And that's just the mods 8(0(*
Exactly.
-
The supporter's of the McCanns have very few facts to work with.
Those who doubt the McCanns have a lot of material to support their case. Their posts are based on many facts.
That's why those who suspect or disbelieve the McCanns are attacked. They post facts which are in the files or taken from videos of interviews. The only way to answer them is either by using opinion, (which is no use as it's subjective) or to attack the credibility of the poster.
Their posts are based on their interpretation of the facts...just opinion....nothing more
-
Their posts are based on their interpretation of the facts...just opinion....nothing more
In your opinion? I rest my case. @)(++(*
-
On another site. Avatar is a Bond Villain with an eye patch. Named after a cute little Jack Russell in "Midsommer Murders".
Ah yes, that one!..........It must have been a very slow night over there a while ago, when I got a mention as a new poster here, for being unaware of the "speach" joke..........
Something like ; "It" isn`t in on the joke and now "it" is the joke !! Cue a line up of LOLLING placards.
Such merriment ensued! ?{)(**
"Small potatoes"..........others get a worse going over. Anything goes because it`s all in the "noble cause of defending the McCanns.".................or so I was told........
The might of the self-appointed righteous.
Being referred to as an "it" to be ignored and treated with the contempt it deserves" on this forum, quite recently, surprised and upset me at the time though.
......but then..........."If you can`t stand the heat" and all that....I`m outspoken in tone sometimes which can attract that sort of thing.
-
In your opinion? I rest my case. @)(++(*
And your posts are simply your opinion
Nothing more
-
And your posts are simply your opinion
Nothing more
My opinion is as follows; I think the McCanns were wrong to leave their children alone in an unlocked apartment. I also think they didn't tell the whole truth about the events of 3rd May 2007. I formed these opinions by looking at the facts we have available. They admit to leaving their children and their statements show inconsistencies which suggest they haven't told the whole truth. My posts are designed to provide information supporting my opinions. The information isn't my opinion, it's taken from statements and interviews and I provide links.
-
My opinion is as follows; I think the McCanns were wrong to leave their children alone in an unlocked apartment. I also think they didn't tell the whole truth about the events of 3rd May 2007. I formed these opinions by looking at the facts we have available. They admit to leaving their children and their statements show inconsistencies which suggest they haven't told the whole truth. My posts are designed to provide information supporting my opinions. The information isn't my opinion, it's taken from statements and interviews and I provide links.
But selected to support your opinion.
-
But selected to support your opinion.
Naturally. It should be easy to refute my selections using other selections, but usually the replies are along the lines of;
'Stop nitpicking' 'People do forget what they've said over time' 'This is just another example of vilifying the victims of a crime' 'The translations are wrong'
-
Naturally. It should be easy to refute my selections using other selections, but usually the replies are along the lines of;
'Stop nitpicking' 'People do forget what they've said over time' 'This is just another example of vilifying the victims of a crime' 'The translations are wrong'
There is a particular arrogance in believing that your choice of selections is irrefutable ... particularly when so many are examples of half time scores from games which are not in the same league as the one currently being played.
** snip
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?
-
There is a particular arrogance in believing that your choice of selections is irrefutable ... particularly when so many are examples of half time scores from games which are not in the same league as the one currently being played.
** snip
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?
I never said my posts were irrefutable, I said the replies were mostly based on opinion rather than on facts. Kate McCann's quotes could mean anything. she's hardly going to say she isn't pleased, or Op Grange are telling her nothing, is she?
-
I never said my posts were irrefutable, I said the replies were mostly based on opinion rather than on facts. Kate McCann's quotes could mean anything. she's hardly going to say she isn't pleased, or Op Grange are telling her nothing, is she?
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
-
My opinion is as follows; I think the McCanns were wrong to leave their children alone in an unlocked apartment. I also think they didn't tell the whole truth about the events of 3rd May 2007. I formed these opinions by looking at the facts we have available. They admit to leaving their children and their statements show inconsistencies which suggest they haven't told the whole truth. My posts are designed to provide information supporting my opinions. The information isn't my opinion, it's taken from statements and interviews and I provide links.
most of the statements you rely on have been translated twice and have inaccuracies....according to police it is normal to have some inconsistencies in statements...Having seen all these statements SY said the McCanns were not suspects...you are drawing your own conclusions from the statements...you are forming your own opinion....your posts are simply your own opinion and therefore have no value to anyone else
-
most of the statements you rely on have been translated twice and have inaccuracies....according to police it is normal to have some inconsistencies in statements...Having seen all these statements SY said the McCanns were not suspects...you are drawing your own conclusions from the statements...you are forming your own opinion....your posts are simply your own opinion and therefore have no value to anyone else
Has it ever crossed your mind that other people agree with G-Unit ?
-
most of the statements you rely on have been translated twice and have inaccuracies....according to police it is normal to have some inconsistencies in statements...Having seen all these statements SY said the McCanns were not suspects...you are drawing your own conclusions from the statements...you are forming your own opinion....your posts are simply your own opinion and therefore have no value to anyone else
Unless, of course, they are made by Martin Grime and Mark Harrison and they say that the dog alerts are not evidence. Perhaps they were wrongly translated? @)(++(*
-
Has it ever crossed your mind that other people agree with G-Unit ?
people like you...but not the people who matter
-
Unless, of course, they are made by Martin Grime and Mark Harrison and they say that the dog alerts are not evidence. Perhaps they were wrongly translated? @)(++(*
you really are starting to struggle now...tis a joy to see
-
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
-
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
Or you.
-
you really are starting to struggle now...tis a joy to see
I'm not struggling at all. You can't pick and choose and doubt the statements you don't like then quote those you do like. All OK or none OK!
-
Or you.
Of course.........Why would you think I was, or that I would even think I was ?
(Or have you another reason for jumping on my post ?)
-
Of course.........Why would you think I was, or that I would even think I was ?
(Or have you another reason for jumping on my post ?)
I am bound to have, am I not? Be thankful that I don't comment all that often.
-
people like you...but not the people who matter
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Have you ever tried making an original comment ?
-
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Have you ever tried making an original comment ?
Have you?
-
Have you?
Absolutely.
How about you Eleanor as your position on this case is well known ?
-
8((()*/
Naturally. It should be easy to refute my selections using other selections, but usually the replies are along the lines of;
'Stop nitpicking' 'People do forget what they've said over time' 'This is just another example of vilifying the victims of a crime' 'The translations are wrong'
8((()*/ 8@??)(
Well said G.,
They have no real argument-name calling is all they have-let us laugh at their pettyness.
-
8((()*/
8((()*/ 8@??)(
Well said G.,
They have no real argument-name calling is all they have-let us laugh at their pettyness.
Ditto.
-
I'm not struggling at all. You can't pick and choose and doubt the statements you don't like then quote those you do like. All OK or none OK!
you are at last beginning to understand...it's all opinion
-
I am bound to have, am I not? Be thankful that I don't comment all that often.
As far as I`m concerned you can comment all you like.
.....but why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
ETA
Ah I get it.........."The might of the self-appointed righteous" coming into play. 8)-)))
-
Why, though?
Why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
lol @you daring to question Kate being 'in the loop' with the Met. What fanciful ideas!! The PJ made it very clear about the secrecy issue.
The Met are working with PJ not under the direction of Kate n Gerry.
With this lack of interest in 'what katie did next saga' she grabs publicity to go riding bikes?
-
Absolutely.
How about you Eleanor as your position on this case is well known ?
But I don't bore everyone half to death on a daily basis.
And I have never deleted one single one of of your repeat performances. Unless they contained an insult.
-
lol @you daring to question Kate being 'in the loop' with the Met. What fanciful ideas!! The PJ made it very clear about the secrecy issue.
The Met are working with PJ not under the direction of Kate n Gerry.
With this lack of interest in 'what katie did next saga' she grabs publicity to go riding bikes?
I know.........Shock Horror!
Caused a bit of hyperventilation seemingly.
-
But I don't bore everyone half to death on a daily basis.
And I have never deleted one single one of of your repeat performances. Unless they contained an insult.
Not everyone, perhaps.
-
But I don't bore everyone half to death on a daily basis.
And I have never deleted one single one of of your repeat performances. Unless they contained an insult.
How do you know you don't bore people ?
I find it extremely boring, as do others, when certain people keep repeating and supporting, abduction day after day as if it is a fact, when it certainly isn't?
Now that is boring .
-
Why, though?
Why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
ETA
Ah I get it.........."The might of the self-appointed righteous" coming into play. 8)-)))
Have I ever said that you are in some kind of Loop? Just don't play "Self Righteous" games with me. I can spot twisted words at ten miles. Better men than you have tried.
You attack away. Just don't try me. And don't complain when you get a reaction.
-
Have I ever said that you are in some kind of Loop? Just don't play "Self Righteous" games with me. I can spot twisted words at ten miles. Better men than you have tried.
You attack away. Just don't try me. And don't complain when you get a reaction.
Oh stop showboating.
You picked on a post for no reason. End of.
-
How do you know you don't bore people ?
I find it extremely boring, as do others, when certain people keep repeating and supporting, abduction day after day as if it is a fact, when it certainly isn't?
Now that is boring .
Because I rarely comment. What others have to say is actually nothing to do with me. So stick to slagging off what I say, if you wish to communicate with me at all.
And I will go on allowing you to repeat yourself ad infinitum.
-
Oh stop showboating.
You picked on a post for no reason. End of.
If you think so. It's sounding a bit paranoid to me.
-
Because I rarely comment. What others have to say is actually nothing to do with me. So stick to slagging off what I say, if you wish to communicate with me at all.
And I will go on allowing you to repeat yourself ad infinitum.
There goes the old cliche about me repeating myself.
I have made the offer before about mccann supporters repeating abduction as a fact.
It isn't.
They still do.
It's their choice. 8(0(*
-
If you think so. It's sounding a bit paranoid to me.
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
-
you are at last beginning to understand...it's all opinion
That makes no sense at all to me, sorry.
-
I think the whole thread is an encouragement to paranoia and thin skinned hypocrisy.
-
There goes the old cliche about me repeating myself.
I have made the offer before about mccann supporters repeating abduction as a fact.
It isn't.
They still do.
It's their choice. 8(0(*
Precisely. You stick with your mantra. And I will go on advocating Abduction.
-
I think the whole thread is an encouragement to paranoia and thin skinned hypocrisy.
There you go with that 'thinking' thing again. thin skinned hypocrisy indeed. Panic sets in everytime someone crushes the 'abductor theory' or Kate's new lifestyle. I just wonder why she is ambassador for missing people because we have been led to beleive he daughter was 'abducted. so should there not be an abductee convention or something?
-
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
Perhaps you should have explained yourself a trifle better.
And cut the crap about my need for slow, deep breaths. I can also spot an insult at ten miles.
-
Precisely. You stick with your mantra. And I will go on advocating Abduction.
For abduction is your mantra.
For without that what do you have ? 8)-)))
-
I think the whole thread is an encouragement to paranoia and thin skinned hypocrisy.
Of course it is. But not my choice. That's how important I am around here.
-
Of course it is. But not my choice. That's how important I am around here.
You didn't have to be a moderator.
Other people could have done the job.
-
For abduction is your mantra.
For without that what do you have ? 8)-)))
I have hope, Stephen. You have nothing but spite.
-
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
Eleanor made a simple comment and you attacked her. Can you explain the conversation and your reasoning behind this?
Alfred
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
Carew
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
E…Senior Mod
Or you.
Carew
Of course.........Why would you think I was, or that I would even think I was ?
(Or have you another reason for jumping on my post ?)
(where did Eleanor say that you were in a loop?)
E
I am bound to have, am I not? Be thankful that I don't comment all that often.
Carew
As far as I`m concerned you can comment all you like.
.....but why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
(She didn't)
ETA
Ah I get it.........."The might of the self-appointed righteous" coming into play.
(insulting)
E
Have I ever said that you are in some kind of Loop? Just don't play "Self Righteous" games with me. I can spot twisted words at ten miles. Better men than you have tried.
You attack away. Just don't try me. And don't complain when you get a reaction.
Carew
Oh stop showboating.
You picked on a post for no reason. End of.
(Untrue)
E
If you think so. It's sounding a bit paranoid to me.
Carew
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
-
Perhaps you should have explained yourself a trifle better.
And cut the crap about my need for slow, deep breaths. I can also spot an insult at ten miles.
Explained myself better?
What could be clearer ?
When in a hole, stop digging. F.G.S.!
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on Today at 05:32:28 PM
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
-
I have hope, Stephen. You have nothing but spite.
Really
How little you understand me.
However, you have pipe dreams of Madeleine returning from nowhere.
Mmmm.
-
Eleanor made a simple comment and you attacked her. Can you explain the conversation and your reasoning behind this?
Alfred
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
Carew
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
E…Senior Mod
Or you.
Carew
Of course.........Why would you think I was, or that I would even think I was ?
(Or have you another reason for jumping on my post ?)
(where did Eleanor say that you were in a loop?)
E
I am bound to have, am I not? Be thankful that I don't comment all that often.
Carew
As far as I`m concerned you can comment all you like.
.....but why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
(She didn't)
ETA
Ah I get it.........."The might of the self-appointed righteous" coming into play.
(insulting)
E
Have I ever said that you are in some kind of Loop? Just don't play "Self Righteous" games with me. I can spot twisted words at ten miles. Better men than you have tried.
You attack away. Just don't try me. And don't complain when you get a reaction.
Carew
Oh stop showboating.
You picked on a post for no reason. End of.
(Untrue)
E
If you think so. It's sounding a bit paranoid to me.
Carew
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
No need, thankyou.
There was never any need to question my post to Alfred.
It was quite simple and reasonable.
-
You didn't have to be a moderator.
Other people could have done the job.
No one else wanted the job. And I certainly wasn't the first to be asked. But I do have to say that I do get some sense of purpose from what I do. Hour after boring hour, most of the time.
But you need to do it before you begin to realise the purpose of this Forum. And your right to repeat yourself over and over again.
And this has been one of my better learning curves.
-
No need, thankyou.
There was never any need to question my post to Alfred.
It was quite simple and reasonable.
She didn't question it she simply said "Or You" in reply to your answer to Alfred that said that he did not know.
-
No one else wanted the job. And I certainly wasn't the first to be asked. But I do have to say that I do get some sense of purpose from what I do. Hour after boring hour, most of the time.
But you need to do it before you begin to realise the purpose of this Forum. And your right to repeat yourself over and over again.
And this has been one of my better learning curves.
Yet you repeat abduction, again and again and again.
In criticizing others for what you do yourself is hypocrisy, is it not ?
P.S. How do you know other people didn't want the job ?
-
Yet you repeat abduction, again and again and again.
In criticizing others for what you do yourself is hypocrisy, is it not ?
P.S. How do you know other people didn't want the job ?
Attacking someone who does not suspect the McCanns Stephen?
-
Attacking someone who does not suspect the McCanns Stephen?
How many times have I been attacked on here for not believing the abduction mantra ?
-
She didn't question it she simply said "Or You" in reply to your answer to Alfred that said that he did not know.
It is obvious that none of us are in the "loop."
Why would it therefore be necessary in the life of a busy moderator to point out the obvious that I`m not in S.Y.s " loop "either ?
Of course I`m not!
i.m.o. it was just an excuse to nit-pick at a "sceptic"
-
It is obvious that none of us are in the "loop."
Why would it therefore be necessary in the life of a busy moderator to point out the obvious that I`m not in S.Y.s " loop "either ?
Of course I`m not!
i.m.o. it was just an excuse to nit-pick at a "sceptic"
Yes, from reading the posts I agree Carew.
-
How many times have I been attacked on here for not believing the abduction mantra ?
What is the topic of this thread?
-
Really
How little you understand me.
However, you have pipe dreams of Madeleine returning from nowhere.
Mmmm.
Yes, I do have hopes of such a thing. I have had involuntarily thoughts of other horror stories, just as Kate did. But I can't live like that on a permanent basis, anymore than she could. And so I revert to hope, just as she has.
Is this so wrong? Has hope been exterminated in your world?
-
What is the topic of this thread?
The mccanns !
-
It is obvious that none of us are in the "loop."
Why would it therefore be necessary in the life of a busy moderator to point out the obvious that I`m not in S.Y.s " loop "either ?
Of course I`m not!
i.m.o. it was just an excuse to nit-pick at a "sceptic"
Why don't you read the posts again
-
Yes, I do have hopes of such a thing. I have had involuntarily thoughts of other horror stories, just as Kate did. But I can't live like that on a permanent basis, anymore than she could. And so I revert to hope, just as she has.
Is this so wrong? Has hope been exterminated in your world?
Hardly.
However, I am grounded in reality.
Call me cynical, but like Angelo has stated, Madeleine never left the area around PDL.
-
I have hope, Stephen. You have nothing but spite.
I don't think disbelieving the abduction theory has anything to do with spite. There's no evidence whatsoever that we know of that an abduction took place. There are other possibilities, so why should everyone accept just that one theory?
-
Why don't you read the posts again
It may or may not be intentional, but this thead is showing all the signs of being very true, not only attacked by trolls but by Mods.
Eleanor is very vocal and has shown to be more than capable of handeling issues with poster members and was discussing with Carew, there was no need for you to to pick on him. I think his watched status should be removed.
-
It may or may not be intentional, but this thead is showing all the signs of being very true, not only attacked by trolls but by Mods.
Eleanor is very vocal and has shown to be more than capable of handeling issues with poster members and was discussing with Carew, there was no need for you to to pick on him. I think his watched status should be removed.
just my opinion but i think mods who are really biased about the mcanns should not be a mod there is no room for discussion anymore imo the mod and she knows who she is is very heavy handed she is allowed her views but so are we
-
Hardly.
However, I am grounded in reality.
Call me cynical, but like Angelo has stated, Madeleine never left the area around PDL.
reality is inportant
-
reality is inportant
Exactly.
-
Just take a few slow, deep breaths and try to accept that it is not a "fact" that the McCanns are in the " loop."
That was all I said in response to Alfred`s post.
How do you know it's not a fact? Do you work for the Met?
-
Exactly.
all the denying of reality in this case wont bring maddie back and we all know what the catalyst was that started all this dont we
-
It may or may not be intentional, but this thead is showing all the signs of being very true, not only attacked by trolls but by Mods.
Eleanor is very vocal and has shown to be more than capable of handeling issues with poster members and was discussing with Carew, there was no need for you to to pick on him. I think his watched status should be removed.
No worries, but thanks Miss Taken Identity.
I`m a "she" by the way.
-
No worries, but thanks Miss Taken Identity.
I`m a "she" by the way.
carew i support you Eleanors heavy handedness and deleting has not gone unoticed and it is censorhip yet on the forum we all know she goes too she talks about GA and others
-
Yet you repeat abduction, again and again and again.
In criticizing others for what you do yourself is hypocrisy, is it not ?
P.S. How do you know other people didn't want the job ?
I do not repeat Abduction over and over again, because I rarely comment.
And with my vociferous attitude in days of yore, which was at least two years ago now, do you think that John didn't see me as a wild card?
He didn't choose me lightly. In the end John simply relied on my integrity. And my ability to cope with the shite that gets thrown at every P r o Mod that ever tried to keep this Forum on track.
It was my ability to cope with the shite that won it for me in the end. My integrity was never in question.
And Yes, I did want the job. But I doubt that you would understand for why.
Sometimes I think it is a pity that he didn't ask you because you might well have come across. And maybe have learned as much as I have done.
-
I do not repeat Abduction over and over again, because I rarely comment.
And with my vociferous attitude in days of yore, which was at least two years ago now, do you think that John didn't see me as a wild card?
He didn't choose me lightly. In the end John simply relied on my integrity. And my ability to cope with the shite that gets thrown at every P r o Mod that ever tried to keep this Forum on track.
It was my ability to cope with the shite that won it for me in the end. My integrity was never in question.
And Yes, I did want the job. But I doubt that you would understand for why.
Sometimes I think it is a pity that he didn't ask you because you might well have come across. And maybe have learned as much as I have done.
with all due respect it isnt your job to convert anyone to the mcanns side or is it??
-
No worries, but thanks Miss Taken Identity.
I`m a "she" by the way.
OOps My apologies. 8()-000(
-
OOps My apologies. 8()-000(
do you agree with me that some on this forum are so biased that it doesnt allow others to have their say?? i really think so
-
How do you know it's not a fact? Do you work for the Met?
The post I replied to originally is copied below.
You stated that it was a fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop and I said they don`t know.
I do apologise if the words in the post you just replied to don`t match my original one.
No, I don`t work for the met.
Anything else?
( gimme strength.)
Quote from: Alfred R Jones on Today at 05:32:28 PM
Why not? She could say nothing, or give a non-committal reply, or even express impatience at the time it's taking to get answers - it would not have a bearing on the investigation one way or the other, would it? It really does stick in the craw of some people, the thought that the McCanns are both pleased with the progress being made by Op Grange, and the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, and they (the sceptics) aren't. Well, too bad!
It isn`t a "fact"
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and neither do you.
-
Scotland Yard would not comment on the latest development but released a statement saying they are encouraged by the progress they are making.
It said: "Detectives remain in regular contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and are working closely with the Portuguese police in an attempt to make further progress."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857
Just one report verifying the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, a fact which clearly sticks in the craw of some people, as we have seen amply demonstrated here tonight!
-
with all due respect it isnt your job to convert anyone to the mcanns side or is it??
You have it one. The job is to be impartial in deffing out dodgy posts, off topic posts and insulting posts.
The crunch is: a person is judged by their deeds not their words.
-
You have it one. The job is to be impartial in deffing out dodgy posts, off topic posts and insulting posts.
The crunch is: a person is judged by their deeds not their words.
Could you pass on your wise words to Angelo while you're at it, he's the most biased and obnoxious mod I've ever come across (and yes, it's worth the warning I will receive to say so!)
-
Scotland Yard would not comment on the latest development but released a statement saying they are encouraged by the progress they are making.
It said: "Detectives remain in regular contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and are working closely with the Portuguese police in an attempt to make further progress."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857
Just one report verifying the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, a fact which clearly sticks in the craw of some people, as we have seen amply demonstrated here tonight!
It don't stick in my throat pal. Do you have a cite more current than two years old?
-
It don't stick in my throat pal. Do you have a cite more current than two years old?
they seem to live in the past dont they
-
It don't stick in my throat pal. Do you have a cite more current than two years old?
Not without spending more time than I have tonight googling the arse out of it. Perhaps you can provide a cite which proves the McCanns are not being kept in the loop instead, if you think this issue is worth arguing about?
-
Scotland Yard would not comment on the latest development but released a statement saying they are encouraged by the progress they are making.
It said: "Detectives remain in regular contact with Kate and Gerry McCann and are working closely with the Portuguese police in an attempt to make further progress."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22918857
Just one report verifying the fact that the McCanns are being kept in the loop, a fact which clearly sticks in the craw of some people, as we have seen amply demonstrated here tonight!
Yes they're very encouraged when the Yard eliminated their abductor and released their suppressed efits. One mission they have is identifying prime suspect Smithman and many on this forum will also disappear if that happens 8)--))
-
Not without spending more time than I have tonight googling the arse out of it. Perhaps you can provide a cite which proves the McCanns are not being kept in the loop instead, if you think this issue is worth arguing about?
I don't, but clearly you do otherwise you wouldn't post on it.
The cops will do what cops always do i.e play off both ends against the middle.
-
If what Kate McCann said today is a lie, and they are not being updated about the investigation's progress and are not being told stuff in confidence by the Met then guess what? The Met themselves will have cast iron proof that Kate McCann is lying to the world. Now, why would she go and do a thing like that, lie in an interview only to be instantly caught out as a liar by the force investigating her child's disappearance? Explanation, anyone?
-
Not without spending more time than I have tonight googling the arse out of it. Perhaps you can provide a cite which proves the McCanns are not being kept in the loop instead, if you think this issue is worth arguing about?
Why google?, just ask Gerry or Kate...if they know they will tell you. 8**8:/: BUT here's the thing The PJ will not divulge anything to the McCanns-not a sausage due to their secrecy laws. AND as I recall, the PJ and SY were having serious fall outs according the the MSN UK. Recall the ehadlines about the Portugues not being helpfull.. hmmh huh recall all that> huh well that all suddenly stopped. no sources no links and ziltch from the PJ.
All zippety do dahz.
For the record DCI Redwood is not the MET he is one person. No longer on the case...
-
If what Kate McCann said today is a lie, and they are not being updated about the investigation's progress and are not being told stuff in confidence by the Met then guess what? The Met themselves will have cast iron proof that Kate McCann is lying to the world. Now, why would she go and do a thing like that, lie in an interview only to be instantly caught out as a liar by the force investigating her child's disappearance? Explanation, anyone?
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and Kate didn`t claim that, did she?
-
If what Kate McCann said today is a lie, and they are not being updated about the investigation's progress and are not being told stuff in confidence by the Met then guess what? The Met themselves will have cast iron proof that Kate McCann is lying to the world. Now, why would she go and do a thing like that, lie in an interview only to be instantly caught out as a liar by the force investigating her child's disappearance? Explanation, anyone?
Wouldn't be the first interview she lied to the world...Oprah Winfrey regarding Maddies Pjammies.. how Jane Tanner saw the abductor and the pjammies?...
She would just say she was 'misquoted'....if the MET were worried at all.
-
As far as I`m concerned you can comment all you like.
.....but why should you want to comment to effect that I think I`m in the "loop" when I gave no impression that I think that ?
&%+((£
-
Why don't you read the posts again
Why don`t you ?
-
The McCanns don`t know how much of the "loop" they are in and Kate didn`t claim that, did she?
they are certainly more in the loop than you are, much to your obvious annoyance!
-
Hardly.
However, I am grounded in reality.
Call me cynical, but like Angelo has stated, Madeleine never left the area around PDL.
Oh she did.
She went up to Porto to begin with.
Then when things got too hot, she left Portugal %£&)**#
-
If what Kate McCann said today is a lie, and they are not being updated about the investigation's progress and are not being told stuff in confidence by the Met then guess what? The Met themselves will have cast iron proof that Kate McCann is lying to the world. Now, why would she go and do a thing like that, lie in an interview only to be instantly caught out as a liar by the force investigating her child's disappearance? Explanation, anyone?
Kate didn't say they were being updated about the investigation's progress. She didn't say the Met were telling them things in confidence. What she said I have re-posted to remind you. It's all very vague and won't bother the Met or the PJ.
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?
-
they are certainly more in the loop than you are, much to your obvious annoyance!
Hmmmm..........others seem annoyed with me, apparently.
A short reply to your inaccuracy saw to that. 8)-)))
-
Kate didn't say they were being updated about the investigation's progress. She didn't say the Met were telling them things in confidence. What she said I have re-posted to remind you. It's all very vague and won't bother the Met or the PJ.
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?
How would she know these things if she wasn't being kept in the loop or told stuff that she was unable to divulge? If she only knew as much as you or I know and went on telly to say what she did say, then as a member of Operation Grange I would be thinking "that woman's making it up!" which wouldn't be a very sensible thing for,her to do now would it?
-
If what Kate McCann said today is a lie, and they are not being updated about the investigation's progress and are not being told stuff in confidence by the Met then guess what? The Met themselves will have cast iron proof that Kate McCann is lying to the world. Now, why would she go and do a thing like that, lie in an interview only to be instantly caught out as a liar by the force investigating her child's disappearance? Explanation, anyone?
Excellent observation Alfie. 8@??)(
Why would Kate be such a fool as to lie, when if she did, SY would have her nailed as a liar ?
Think about it, you guys.
-
How would she know these things if she wasn't being kept in the loop or told stuff that she was unable to divulge? If she only knew as much as you or I know and went on telly to say what she did say, then as a member of Operation Grange I would be thinking "that woman's making it up!" which wouldn't be a very sensible thing for,her to do now would it?
What things? It sounds like the kind of thing a politician might say. Suitably vague and encouraging but saying nothing much.
-
Kate didn't say they were being updated about the investigation's progress. She didn't say the Met were telling them things in confidence. What she said I have re-posted to remind you. It's all very vague and won't bother the Met or the PJ.
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879? (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?)
Kate said:-
Watch video
http://www.itv.com/goodmorningbritain/news/kate-mccann-charity-bike-ride-for-missing-people-child-rescue-alert (http://www.itv.com/goodmorningbritain/news/kate-mccann-charity-bike-ride-for-missing-people-child-rescue-alert)
'It’s inevitable I will be thinking of Madeleine'
7:39 - 15 JUN 2015
Well obviously I can’t give any investigation details out but let’s just say we’re really encouraged. There has been a lot of progress in the last six months plus, last year. The co-operation between the UK and the Portuguese seems to be really good which is really positive for us and I can say there is progress being made.–
Kate McCannKate McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, is taking part in a bike ride from Edinburgh to London to raise awareness and funds for the charities Missing People and Child Rescue Alert. The team plan to cycle 500 miles in five days, and we're catching up with them on day three.Eight years since Madeleine McCann disappeared, a child is reported missing every five minutes in the UK (National Crime Agency figures 2012/13) - 89% of those missing incidents are resolved within 48 hours.Child Rescue Alert is a UK-wide alerting system to secure the safe return of the most vulnerable missing children - the charity currently have 556 live appeals.Kate tells us that she is 'encouraged' by the developments in the search for her missing daughter, and that when times get tough she'll be saying "I’m doing this for Madeleine, I’m doing this for all missing children.”
-
What things? It sounds like the kind of thing a politician might say. Suitably vague and encouraging but saying nothing much.
Did Kate give you the impression, or did she not, that she is privy to information about Operation Grange that she is not at liberty to divulge? If she did not give you that impression, then fair enough, that's your opinion, but if she did give that impression then if I was a member of Op Grange I would think her behaviour somewhat odd if I knew that she was completely in the dark about the investigstion. Do you disagree? No doubt you do!
-
Did Kate give you the impression, or did she not, that she is privy to information about Operation Grange that she is not at liberty to divulge? If she did not give you that impression, then fair enough, that's your opinion, but if she did give that impression then if I was a member of Op Grange I would think her behaviour somewhat odd if I knew that she was completely in the dark about the investigstion. Do you disagree? No doubt you do!
That is what it is...an impressoin she is trying to con the public or others are trying to make more of it that there is...where did my posts go?
-
That is what it is...an impressoin she is trying to con the public or others are trying to make more of it that there is...where did my posts go?
Right, we're getting somewhere at last! That being the case, Kate "trying to con the public", how is that going to sit with members of Operation Grange? Is it a very wise thing Kate did "trying to con the public" knowing full well that the Met will see this "con" in operation?
-
Kate said:-
Watch video
http://www.itv.com/goodmorningbritain/news/kate-mccann-charity-bike-ride-for-missing-people-child-rescue-alert (http://www.itv.com/goodmorningbritain/news/kate-mccann-charity-bike-ride-for-missing-people-child-rescue-alert)
'It’s inevitable I will be thinking of Madeleine'
7:39 - 15 JUN 2015
Well obviously I can’t give any investigation details out but let’s just say we’re really encouraged. There has been a lot of progress in the last six months plus, last year. The co-operation between the UK and the Portuguese seems to be really good which is really positive for us and I can say there is progress being made.– Kate McCannKate McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, is taking part in a bike ride from Edinburgh to London to raise awareness and funds for the charities Missing People and Child Rescue Alert. The team plan to cycle 500 miles in five days, and we're catching up with them on day three.Eight years since Madeleine McCann disappeared, a child is reported missing every five minutes in the UK (National Crime Agency figures 2012/13) - 89% of those missing incidents are resolved within 48 hours.Child Rescue Alert is a UK-wide alerting system to secure the safe return of the most vulnerable missing children - the charity currently have 556 live appeals.Kate tells us that she is 'encouraged' by the developments in the search for her missing daughter, and that when times get tough she'll be saying "I’m doing this for Madeleine, I’m doing this for all missing children.”
And? It's not for me to say what that means, but it could mean;
Well obviously I can’t give any investigation details out (coz I don't know any)
let’s just say we’re really encouraged. There has been a lot of progress in the last six months plus, last year (that's what they said when we asked, anyway)
The co-operation between the UK and the Portuguese seems to be really good (I don't know if it really is, but it seems to be) which is really positive for us (I think SY may have managed to convince the PJ that they're not there just to criticise them) and I can say there is progress being made (did I just say that previously? Oh well, repeat)
-
There you go with that 'thinking' thing again. thin skinned hypocrisy indeed. Panic sets in everytime someone crushes the 'abductor theory' or Kate's new lifestyle. I just wonder why she is ambassador for missing people because we have been led to beleive he daughter was 'abducted. so should there not be an abductee convention or something?
As a person who "suspects" the McCanns and who must by definition be one of the "attacked" mentioned in the title of the thread I wonder if you would care to ponder ...
Why you have attacked me for "thinking" and why do you think it is important to attack Kate McCann in such an ignorant and unpleasant way?
Why aren't you taking the opportunity of a thread set up specifically for ... you ... and other "suspicious" people to enumerate the alleged heinous attacks you appear to believe you are suffering?
-
This hideous Thread was always going to speak for itself.
-
Why is it that "suspicious" people are using this thread for everything under the sun (as long as it is derogatory to the mods, other posters and Madeleine McCann's parents) with the exception of discussing in any way whatsoever the "attacks" they are allegedly suffering?
I think since no-one is the least bit interested or able to substantiate these alleged "attacks" ... I think it is about time this distastefully entitled thread was consigned to wherever it is thoroughly nasty and pointless threads are assigned to.
-
Can we now get back on Topic please
-
Why is it that "suspicious" people are using this thread for everything under the sun (as long as it is derogatory to the mods, other posters and Madeleine McCann's parents) with the exception of discussing in any way whatsoever the "attacks" they are allegedly suffering?
I think since no-one is the least bit interested or able to substantiate these alleged "attacks" ... I think it is about time this distastefully entitled thread was consigned to wherever it is thoroughly nasty and pointless threads are assigned to.
It must surely be shaming at times for those members who are, or have been in any way associated with thoroughly nasty, pointless, distasteful sites whose sole purpose is to target and attack those who doubt or suspect the McCanns.
One such site has been alluded to earlier in the thread and has a title directly related to this forum and "discusses" members past and present from this forum.
Links are easy to find if anyone has the appetite to read such "material."
That no-one is inclined to bring it here is not an indication that it does not exist.
-
Kate didn't say they were being updated about the investigation's progress. She didn't say the Met were telling them things in confidence. What she said I have re-posted to remind you. It's all very vague and won't bother the Met or the PJ.
Kate McCann has said she is "really encouraged" by the progress being made in the case of her missing daughter Madeleine.
Kate said she couldn't reveal details of the investigation but said there had been "a lot" of progress in the last six months.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-mum-kate-really-5884879?
It certainly doesn't sound as though they feel they are being investigated themselves which some deluded posters think could be happening
-
And? It's not for me to say what that means, but it could mean;
Well obviously I can’t give any investigation details out (coz I don't know any)
let’s just say we’re really encouraged. There has been a lot of progress in the last six months plus, last year (that's what they said when we asked, anyway)
The co-operation between the UK and the Portuguese seems to be really good (I don't know if it really is, but it seems to be) which is really positive for us (I think SY may have managed to convince the PJ that they're not there just to criticise them) and I can say there is progress being made (did I just say that previously? Oh well, repeat)
Precisely, it's not lying just carefully worded.
-
Precisely, it's not lying just carefully worded.
The whole internet anti McCann movement is falling apart...you just can't see it
-
The whole internet anti McCann movement is falling apart...you just can't see it
If we look at recent fund raising efforts by two of the main players it would appear that those who doubt the McCanns outnumber their supporters by at least two to one.
-
If we look at recent fund raising efforts by two of the main players it would appear that those who doubt the McCanns outnumber their supporters by at least two to one.
amaral has about 1000 contributors...from all over the world...doesn't sound like a lot to me
-
amaral has about 1000 contributors...from all over the world...doesn't sound like a lot to me
It's around twice as many as Kate McCann, as I said. I have no other way of assessing how many people believe the McCanns and how many doubt them. It's not hard evidence but it's an indication. It would perhaps explain why those who doubt them are attacked. There's no point in suing them because they have no money. The police aren't interested in arresting them so 'dossiers' are a waste of time. The only option left is to bully and harass them so they shut up and go away. Of course that obviously isn't working either.
-
It's around twice as many as Kate McCann, as I said. I have no other way of assessing how many people believe the McCanns and how many doubt them. It's not hard evidence but it's an indication. It would perhaps explain why those who doubt them are attacked. There's no point in suing them because they have no money. The police aren't interested in arresting them so 'dossiers' are a waste of time. The only option left is to bully and harass them so they shut up and go away. Of course that obviously isn't working either.
I think you need to wake up to reality....don't you see McCann supporters being attacked
-
It's around twice as many as Kate McCann, as I said. I have no other way of assessing how many people believe the McCanns and how many doubt them. It's not hard evidence but it's an indication. It would perhaps explain why those who doubt them are attacked. There's no point in suing them because they have no money. The police aren't interested in arresting them so 'dossiers' are a waste of time. The only option left is to bully and harass them so they shut up and go away. Of course that obviously isn't working either.
How many people support the McCann-controlled Facebook page? Compare the number of likes and shares a post quoting Kate or Gerry gets versus any of the main sceptic Facebook pages, you will then see who has the greater support.
-
Oh she did.
She went up to Porto to begin with.
Then when things got too hot, she left Portugal %£&)**#
So you were there sadie and witnessed all these events ? &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
-
The whole internet anti McCann movement is falling apart...you just can't see it
Now you were talking about delusions ?
?>)()<
-
It must surely be shaming at times for those members who are, or have been in any way associated with thoroughly nasty, pointless, distasteful sites whose sole purpose is to target and attack those who doubt or suspect the McCanns.
One such site has been alluded to earlier in the thread and has a title directly related to this forum and "discusses" members past and present from this forum.
Links are easy to find if anyone has the appetite to read such "material."
That no-one is inclined to bring it here is not an indication that it does not exist.
Were I capable of enumerating every site set up with the sole purpose of "doubting" or "suspecting" or to be just downright nasty as far as Madeleine McCann's parents are concerned I would be a very busy little bee indeed.
Only yesterday Stephen was gloating over hateful comments made in a national newspaper which he found edifying but which must have bemused the ordinary reader who might have been expecting to read something which reflected positively on a charity bike ride instead of diatribes about one of the participants.
Some of the comments attached by supporters to the Goncalo Amaral appeal fund reflect some very unbalanced and disturbed opinions indeed.
People who are "suspicious" of Madeleine's parents, many of whom have been indulging themselves in attacks on the Drs McCann for a mind boggling eight years, are asserting it is they who are under attack.
Come on ... you will have to do a bit better than making generalisations ... come up with the specifics of the situation you appear to be claiming.
I think your difficulty may very well be that the alleged "attacks" are figments of fevered imagination and are actually rebuttals which challenge the veracity of many of the 'facts' and 'opinions' promulgated day in and day out by some of the most ill informed people ever given access to a keyboard.
-
The whole internet anti McCann movement is falling apart...you just can't see it
I think it is seen, Davel, hence the desperation of trying to retrieve something from eight years of unrelenting spite and sheer nastiness.
The death knell was the reopening of Madeleine's case, especially in Portugal ... which is why there has been such opposition to it happening, to it continuing and to the thought of a positive conclusion.
-
If we look at recent fund raising efforts by two of the main players it would appear that those who doubt the McCanns outnumber their supporters by at least two to one.
Isn't that comparing apples and oranges?
The purpose of the two fund-raising initiatives is totally different.
-
Isn't that comparing apples and oranges?
The purpose of the two fund-raising initiatives is totally different.
It is ridiculous to compare the two, Kate McCann is not raising money for herself it's for a charity, many people support charities and can't afford to support all of them, they usually stick to those they have chosen to support.
-
Stephen and Carly - it surprises me not one iota that you are both now whining about "biased moderators"
Both of you - grow up.
The mods here do an excellent job of refereeing, and deserve thanks,
If you actually read what I said earlier in regard to to what was said last year in appointing new mods last year, and which was abided by, I would have no quibbles.
In my view, moderators should be just that and do the job they accepted, i.e. to moderate.
I have no problem with people having their views, but sometimes bias is inevitable.
So JP, what is wrong with that proposal ?
-
Thank you for the comments Alfie, you have just become the threads finest protagonist.
-
If you actually read what I said earlier in regard to to what was said last year in appointing new mods last year, and which was abided by, I would have no quibbles.
In my view, moderators should be just that and do the job they accepted, i.e. to moderate.
I have no problem with people having their views, but sometimes bias is inevitable.
So JP, what is wrong with that proposal ?
So are you suggesting that moderators simply moderate - and not post or engage with any opinions?
-
Topic please. Clue: Its not about moderators.
-
Topic please. Clue: Its not about moderators.
Fair point Angelo, no disrespect intended.
-
How many people support the McCann-controlled Facebook page? Compare the number of likes and shares a post quoting Kate or Gerry gets versus any of the main sceptic Facebook pages, you will then see who has the greater support.
Facebook 'likes' and 'shares' are easily bought and therefore easily manipulated. The OFM tall of 'likes' went from 160 odd thousand, built up over 6 years, to over half a million almost overnight at the time of the Crimewatch reconstruction. Does anyone really believe that that could happen without some major manipulation of the figures ?
http://fbskip.com
-
Thank you for the comments Alfie, you have just become the threads finest protagonist.
You're welcome, but you had the last laugh so you must feel happy about that at least. And you managed to see off OxfordBloo too, so well done for that as well. 8((()*/
-
Facebook 'likes' and 'shares' are easily bought and therefore easily manipulated. The OFM tall of 'likes' went from 160 odd thousand, built up over 6 years, to over half a million almost overnight at the time of the Crimewatch reconstruction. Does anyone really believe that that could happen without some major manipulation of the figures ?
http://fbskip.com
Why don't you provide some actual evidence of your accusations and smears for once? How about analysing the OFM likes and shares and seeing how many of them are obviously bogus? These can be easily spotted as they are usually by names which are not European-sounding. Off you go, there's a project for you!
-
Facebook 'likes' and 'shares' are easily bought and therefore easily manipulated. The OFM tall of 'likes' went from 160 odd thousand, built up over 6 years, to over half a million almost overnight at the time of the Crimewatch reconstruction. Does anyone really believe that that could happen without some major manipulation of the figures ?
http://fbskip.com
The only 'manipulation' of figures that I know of - is the false Total of how many people have contributed to Amaral's fund - which is being allowed to continue uncorrected on the Gofundme site. IMO a clear case of turning a blind eye to 'useful disinformation' - i.e. it gives the impression to the public that far more people are supporting him than actually are.
-
You're welcome, but you had the last laugh so you must feel happy about that at least. And you managed to see off OxfordBloo too, so well done for that as well. 8((()*/
Why do you think that Angelo had the last laugh, Alfred?
-
You're welcome, but you had the last laugh so you must feel happy about that at least. And you managed to see off OxfordBloo too, so well done for that as well. 8((()*/
So the Moderators aren't all bad then. 8(0(*
-
You're welcome, but you had the last laugh so you must feel happy about that at least. And you managed to see off OxfordBloo too, so well done for that as well. 8((()*/
Debunker/Oxford Bloo always put his foot in it in the end, you get used to posters style after a while so very easy to detect.
And just for the record I had nothing to do with his removal for making rude comments.
-
Debunker/Oxford Blue always put his foot in it in the end, you get used to posters style after a while so very easy to detect.
Why anyone should object to well informed, intelligent posters with an excellent knowledge of relevant facts posting here is a mystery to me.
The response by some posters seems to be to goad them until they retaliate - and then report them. Or the poster gets fed up with the sneering goads and leaves.
Either way it's a loss to the forum IMO.
-
You're welcome, but you had the last laugh so you must feel happy about that at least. And you managed to see off OxfordBloo too, so well done for that as well. 8((()*/
For the sake of clarity, I removed OxfordBloo at his request after receiving the following:
This board has rude and aggressive mods who are uncontrolled by Admin
You do not deserve posters under those circumstances and you certainly do not deserve my time.
Please erase my membership.
His or her posts remain but can be reinstated if he/she decides to return and apologises.
-
Why anyone should object to well informed, intelligent posters with an excellent knowledge of relevant facts posting here is a mystery to me.
The response by some posters seems to be to goad them until they retaliate - and then report them. Or the poster gets fed up with the sneering goads and leaves.
Either way it's a loss to the forum IMO.
Some posters just cannot take criticism and the odd bit of banter. You cannot afford to be thin skinned to post on forums.
ps if I have offended anyone in the past by anything I have posted I apologise profusely.
-
Were I capable of enumerating every site set up with the sole purpose of "doubting" or "suspecting" or to be just downright nasty as far as Madeleine McCann's parents are concerned I would be a very busy little bee indeed.
Only yesterday Stephen was gloating over hateful comments made in a national newspaper which he found edifying but which must have bemused the ordinary reader who might have been expecting to read something which reflected positively on a charity bike ride instead of diatribes about one of the participants.
Some of the comments attached by supporters to the Goncalo Amaral appeal fund reflect some very unbalanced and disturbed opinions indeed.
People who are "suspicious" of Madeleine's parents, many of whom have been indulging themselves in attacks on the Drs McCann for a mind boggling eight years, are asserting it is they who are under attack.
Come on ... you will have to do a bit better than making generalisations ... come up with the specifics of the situation you appear to be claiming.
I think your difficulty may very well be that the alleged "attacks" are figments of fevered imagination and are actually rebuttals which challenge the veracity of many of the 'facts' and 'opinions' promulgated day in and day out by some of the most ill informed people ever given access to a keyboard.
Please do not " think" that my alleged "attacks" are figments of fevered imagination.
It is an insult............but never mind...........You couch yours in so many words they go unnoticed.
People who have ever posted or or condoned posts like the one below from that appalling site alluded to previously are no better than those they feel "attack" the McCanns.
Is that "specific" enough for you?
(Cue a multitude of blustering excuses roughly based on the Noble Pastime of Defending the McCanns.)
"Too late, Lamberton. And child-rape enthusiasts Wonderfulspam, Cariad and jassi have NOT been banned. Even the FB sewers would have banned pervs like those three. "
-
Were I capable of enumerating every site set up with the sole purpose of "doubting" or "suspecting" or to be just downright nasty as far as Madeleine McCann's parents are concerned I would be a very busy little bee indeed.
Only yesterday Stephen was gloating over hateful comments made in a national newspaper which he found edifying but which must have bemused the ordinary reader who might have been expecting to read something which reflected positively on a charity bike ride instead of diatribes about one of the participants.
Some of the comments attached by supporters to the Goncalo Amaral appeal fund reflect some very unbalanced and disturbed opinions indeed.
People who are "suspicious" of Madeleine's parents, many of whom have been indulging themselves in attacks on the Drs McCann for a mind boggling eight years, are asserting it is they who are under attack.
Come on ... you will have to do a bit better than making generalisations ... come up with the specifics of the situation you appear to be claiming.
I think your difficulty may very well be that the alleged "attacks" are figments of fevered imagination and are actually rebuttals which challenge the veracity of many of the 'facts' and 'opinions' promulgated day in and day out by some of the most ill informed people ever given access to a keyboard.
I reported what was in the National Press brietta.
Try keeping to the facts.
I note the Express pages are still there today with the comments.
You are certainly in error if you believe 'normal readers' can't see through the mccanns.
-
Why anyone should object to well informed, intelligent posters with an excellent knowledge of relevant facts posting here is a mystery to me.
The response by some posters seems to be to goad them until they retaliate - and then report them. Or the poster gets fed up with the sneering goads and leaves.
Either way it's a loss to the forum IMO.
I have only ever known OxfordBloo as that ... and I care very little whether he posted under another name at another time or not.
I think he brought a great deal to the forum and upped the ante and raised the tone of the debate ... I think he contributed a lot to the forum with his informed contributions (some of which were way over my head ... but from some I learned a great deal).
I was devastated when he left the forum ... I think posters like him, who are few and far between should be valued and protected from the slings and arrows ... I too think he is a great loss.
-
Debunker/Oxford Bloo always put his foot in it in the end, you get used to posters style after a while so very easy to detect.
And just for the record I had nothing to do with his removal for making rude comments.
He wasn't removed he decided to leave and before he did so he told me the reason why.
-
For the sake of clarity, I removed OxfordBloo at his request after receiving the following:
His or her posts remain but can be reinstated if he/she decides to return and apologises.
Exactly - and we all know the mod he was referring to. %£&)**#
-
I reported what was in the National Press brietta.
Try keeping to the facts.
I note the Express pages are still there today with the comments.
You are certainly in error if you believe 'normal readers' can't see through the mccanns.
I wonder how many normal readers even bother? &%+((£
The really unsettling thing is when one is capable of recognising many of the commentators from many other places and contemplate what it is that drives such people to spend their lives stalking (that is what it is) in particular the mother of a missing child to spit such venom at her.
That you celebrate and that they derive great satisfaction from delighting in such aberrant behaviour says so much.
When one considers this obsession has been indulged and glorified for over eight years ... one does not really need to wonder much more about them.
It seems that the people who "suspect the McCanns" and are allegedly "attacked" for indulging in their worthwhile endeavours ... are no strangers to dishing out attacks whenever and wherever they can get off with it or even on it.
-
Perhaps because nobody was actually named.
-
I have only ever known OxfordBloo as that ... and I care very little whether he posted under another name at another time or not.
I think he brought a great deal to the forum and upped the ante and raised the tone of the debate ... I think he contributed a lot to the forum with his informed contributions (some of which were way over my head ... but from some I learned a great deal).
I was devastated when he left the forum ... I think posters like him, who are few and far between should be valued and protected from the slings and arrows ... I too think he is a great loss.
OxfordBloo had a good knowledge of the 'libel' trial and helped me to understand it. Unfortunately his insistence on his 'scientific' knowledge let him down, particularly when it came to the social 'sciences' and his determination to rely on statistical studies. Statistics are helpful indications when looking at large numbers of cases, but have no relevance in an individual case. He took offence and went off because he wanted to control the moderators. He then went to another forum where he was again recognised instantly as a previous member under another name and he lasted just a few days there. If someone is convinced their opinion is correct they should commit to defending it even if it's difficult, in my opinion.
-
Why anyone should object to well informed, intelligent posters with an excellent knowledge of relevant facts posting here is a mystery to me.
The response by some posters seems to be to goad them until they retaliate - and then report them. Or the poster gets fed up with the sneering goads and leaves.
Either way it's a loss to the forum IMO.
You never worked it out did you?
-
I wonder how many normal readers even bother? &%+((£
The really unsettling thing is when one is capable of recognising many of the commentators from many other places and contemplate what it is that drives such people to spend their lives stalking (that is what it is) in particular the mother of a missing child to spit such venom at her.
That you celebrate and that they derive great satisfaction from delighting in such aberrant behaviour says so much.
When one considers this obsession has been indulged and glorified for over eight years ... one does not really need to wonder much more about them.
It seems that the people who "suspect the McCanns" and are allegedly "attacked" for indulging in their worthwhile endeavours ... are no strangers to dishing out attacks whenever and wherever they can get off with it or even on it.
That reply engenders the true hypocrisy that most mccann supporters like yourself are well practiced in.
You do not criticize the mccanns for their abject neglect and danger they placed their children in.
Instead you merely attack those , including myself who don't believe in the abduction scenario.
Your tactics are both boring and repetitive, but nothing new.
Try to comprehend that people do not believe the mccanns version of the events and never will.
-
Please do not " think" that my alleged "attacks" are figments of fevered imagination.
It is an insult............but never mind...........You couch yours in so many words they go unnoticed.
People who have ever posted or or condoned posts like the one below from that appalling site alluded to previously are no better than those they feel "attack" the McCanns.
Is that "specific" enough for you?
(Cue a multitude of blustering excuses roughly based on the Noble Pastime of Defending the McCanns.)
"Too late, Lamberton. And child-rape enthusiasts Wonderfulspam, Cariad and jassi have NOT been banned. Even the FB sewers would have banned pervs like those three. "
Three guesses for where that came from. Daisy if you need all three @)(++(*
-
OxfordBloo had a good knowledge of the 'libel' trial and helped me to understand it. Unfortunately his insistence on his 'scientific' knowledge let him down, particularly when it came to the social 'sciences' and his determination to rely on statistical studies. Statistics are helpful indications when looking at large numbers of cases, but have no relevance in an individual case. He took offence and went off because he wanted to control the moderators. He then went to another forum where he was again recognised instantly as a previous member under another name and he lasted just a few days there. If someone is convinced their opinion is correct they should commit to defending it even if it's difficult, in my opinion.
I think you're mistaken about that underlined bit, G-Unit. LOL
He always points out that statistics have no relevance to an individual case.
-
That reply engenders the true hypocrisy that most mccann supporters like yourself are well practiced in.
You do not criticize the mccanns for their abject neglect and danger they placed their children in.
Instead you merely attack those , including myself who don't believe in the abduction scenario.
Your tactics are both boring and repetitive, but nothing new.
Try to comprehend that people do not believe the mccanns version of the events and never will.
You have singularly failed to address why you and those you defend are the people who feel they are under attack despite actively participating, encouraging and condoning abusive and hate filled campaigns directed entirely at Madeleine McCann's parents and family.
Not for five minutes ... not for a day ... not even a week ... but for eight solid years without let up. That takes a measure of dedication and it takes a particular type of personality to sustain such vitriol.
-
You have singularly failed to address why you and those you defend are the people who feel they are under attack despite actively participating, encouraging and condoning abusive and hate filled campaigns directed entirely at Madeleine McCann's parents and family.
Not for five minutes ... not for a day ... not even a week ... but for eight solid years without let up. That takes a measure of dedication and it takes a particular type of personality to sustain such vitriol.
The real vitriol on display is clearly from and you have been consistent on that to say the least.
Your pretense at being 'neutral' in this case is merely another charade.
-
The real vitriol on display is clearly from and you have been consistent on that to say the least.
Your pretense at being 'neutral' in this case is merely another charade.
Goodness gracious me !!! ( that's let some of the steam off and saves me from a reprimand for using the expletive I would like to use)
When have I ever pretended to be something I am not???
-
Perhaps because nobody was actually named.
Well, let's put that to the test shall we? In my opinion some of the "sceptics" that post on this forum are fanatical.
Now, if this forum is being fairly moderated then that comment should be allowed to stand.
-
Well why not; everything on here is only an opinion, after all and has no basis in fact.
I'm all for a light handed moderation, particularly when it comes to dealing with off-topic posts.
-
Well, let's put that to the test shall we? In my opinion some of the "sceptics" that post on this forum are fanatical.
Now, if this forum is being fairly moderated then that comment should be allowed to stand.
I have moderated the initial post and yours accordingly to something less provocative. See, I can be helpful if you ask nicely!
-
I reported what was in the National Press brietta.
Try keeping to the facts.
I note the Express pages are still there today with the comments.
You are certainly in error if you believe 'normal readers' can't see through the mccanns.
A bunch of orchestrated comments from Haverns site are not "normal readers". 8(0(*
-
Goodness gracious me !!! ( that's let some of the steam off and saves me from a reprimand for using the expletive I would like to use)
When have I ever pretended to be something I am not???
How the hell would we know? On a completely anonymous forum where there is no means of testing anyone's claims, that comment must rank as one of the doziest ever.
However some posters must be expert at somethings so bluff, bluster ridicule and bullshit not withstanding never the forget the old saw: "To you he may appear an expert to Joe Bloggs he may appear an expert but to an expert he is no expert".
-
I have moderated the initial post and yours accordingly to something less provocative. See, I can be helpful if you ask nicely!
I did ask this question on the forum several times before, over the last few days but thanks for finally addressing it.
-
I have moderated the initial post and yours accordingly to something less provocative. See, I can be helpful if you ask nicely!
Incidentally, I'm not sure how much LESS provocative the OP is now thanks to your helpful intervention asit now says:
Well I shant include accusations of being a paedophile for just not believing the mccanns story as they come from some fanatical mccann supporters, one or two are on here
So some of us are fanatical supporters who accuse sceptics of being paedophiles now are we?!
-
That reply engenders the true hypocrisy that most mccann supporters like yourself are well practiced in.
You do not criticize the mccanns for their abject neglect and danger they placed their children in.
Instead you merely attack those , including myself who don't believe in the abduction scenario.
Your tactics are both boring and repetitive, but nothing new.
Try to com
prehend that people do not believe the mccanns version of the events and never will.
I do not agree with the McCann's for leaving the children. The McCann's have openly said that they thought it was safe and that the regret what they did. They have been interviewed by Social Services and the twins were allowed to stay with them. It is something they will have to live with for the rest of their lives.
It doesn't mean that people have the right to attack and abuse the McCann's every time they are in the news for what ever they are doing.
Why are people choosing the bike ride for Charity to post a load of spite?
Do you agree with the posts Stephen?
The fact that the McCann's have not been charged with anything and that SY say they are not suspects or persons of interest tells me that they should not have to put up with this sort of harassment for that is what it is.
Some have expressed the view that the Needham's are not telling the truth [I totally disagree] but do you see spite written in the scale the McCann's get every time Kerry is in the news?
-
Well why not; everything on here is only an opinion, after all and has no basis in fact.
I'm all for a light handed moderation, particularly when it comes to dealing with off-topic posts.
Errm, you think? £4%4%
-
I think you're mistaken about that underlined bit, G-Unit. LOL
He always points out that statistics have no relevance to an individual case.
Does he? Where? He wouldn't accept that point on here as I recall.
-
Does he? Where? He wouldn't accept that point on here as I recall.
Hand on heart, however, I can't search his posts (aside from half a dozen irrelevant ones). When I find some, I'll post them.
-
Why anyone should object to well informed, intelligent posters with an excellent knowledge of relevant facts posting here is a mystery to me.
The response by some posters seems to be to goad them until they retaliate - and then report them. Or the poster gets fed up with the sneering goads and leaves.
Either way it's a loss to the forum IMO.
Not really, his bluff was called and he flounced.
-
A bunch of orchestrated comments from Haverns site are not "normal readers". 8(0(*
You mean like the members of 'stop the myths' , 'david bret is god'. etc., whose posts appear from the ether on here ?
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
and some of them belong to a certain cadbury's club 8)--))
-
I do not agree with the McCann's for leaving the children. The McCann's have openly said that they thought it was safe and that the regret what they did. They have been interviewed by Social Services and the twins were allowed to stay with them. It is something they will have to live with for the rest of their lives.
It doesn't mean that people have the right to attack and abuse the McCann's every time they are in the news for what ever they are doing.
Why are people choosing the bike ride for Charity to post a load of spite?
Do you agree with the posts Stephen?
The fact that the McCann's have not been charged with anything and that SY say they are not suspects or persons of interest tells me that they should not have to put up with this sort of harassment for that is what it is.
Some have expressed the view that the Needham's are not telling the truth [I totally disagree] but do you see spite written in the scale the McCann's get every time Kerry is in the news?
Abusive posters appear on both sides of the fence an d if you had checked, I condemn them as I'm sure you do.
and what of the mccann supporters on twitter and certain sites who abuse others ad nauseum ?
-
You mean like the members of 'stop the myths' , 'david bret is god'. etc., whose posts appear from the ether on here ?
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
and some of them belong to a certain cadbury's club 8)--))
That David Bret place is a bit scary...
-
That David Bret place is a bit scary...
It belongs in the Twilight Zone or somewhere 'equivalent'.
-
That David Bret place is a bit scary...
I can think of other words which may be more apt.
Mind you there are apparently similar sites about premiership football. That should tell us something.
-
I wonder how many normal readers even bother? &%+((£
The really unsettling thing is when one is capable of recognising many of the commentators from many other places and contemplate what it is that drives such people to spend their lives stalking (that is what it is) in particular the mother of a missing child to spit such venom at her.
That you celebrate and that they derive great satisfaction from delighting in such aberrant behaviour says so much.
When one considers this obsession has been indulged and glorified for over eight years ... one does not really need to wonder much more about them.
It seems that the people who "suspect the McCanns" and are allegedly "attacked" for indulging in their worthwhile endeavours ... are no strangers to dishing out attacks whenever and wherever they can get off with it or even on it.
Never mind..........You had this sort of "worthwhile endeavour" to cling to in your mission to defend against such "indulgence" which was apparently taking place on this very forum !
( Not getting on or off , as you put it, on this sort of thing over there, were they?) 8)-)))
coco wrote: http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post221100.html#p221100
I am monitoring the s c u m and all their followers - screenshots.
yes, your s c u m comments and support of child rape comments will be reported.
good .
Ditto. The press have got a sniff of what Lamberton is allowing on his forum, but the police need to involved.
-
Never mind..........You had this sort of "worthwhile endeavour" to cling to in your mission to defend against such "indulgence" which was apparently taking place on this very forum !
( Not getting on or off , as you put it, on this sort of thing over there, were they?) 8)-)))
coco wrote: http://stopthemyths.prophpbb.com/post221100.html#p221100
I am monitoring the s c u m and all their followers - screenshots.
yes, your s c u m comments and support of child rape comments will be reported.
good .
Ditto. The press have got a sniff of what Lamberton is allowing on his forum, but the police need to involved.
That really does show the 'mentality' of those posters on s t m.
It places the express comments in context.
and those that are in denial among the mccann supporters. &%+((£
-
How the hell would we know? On a completely anonymous forum where there is no means of testing anyone's claims, that comment must rank as one of the doziest ever.
However some posters must be expert at somethings so bluff, bluster ridicule and bullshit not withstanding never the forget the old saw: "To you he may appear an expert to Joe Bloggs he may appear an expert but to an expert he is no expert".
Sigh ... one does tend to get a flavour of the underlying personality from the style and the content of posts, imo.
The fact you feel it incumbent on yourself to make similar jibes to the one above in response to many of my posts has enabled me to make a fair assessment of you.
Is that an "attack"? I'll leave it for you to decide, but please don't murder some doggerel if you do.
-
You mean like the members of 'stop the myths' , 'david bret is god'. etc., whose posts appear from the ether on here ?
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
and some of them belong to a certain cadbury's club 8)--))
I have absolutely no idea what you are on about ... nothing new in that though.
-
I have absolutely no idea what you are on about ... nothing new in that though.
I believe you. &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
-
That really does show the 'mentality' of those liters.
It places the express comments in context.
and those that are you in denial among the mccann supporters. &%+((£
(It`s captured from brett, actually.)
There are others......worse, i.m.o. ..... because they name a specific ex-poster here under veiled threat from these "people" .......a mother with young children.......
" It will get its soon enough."
This material is still out there on view and as far as I know there have been no public apologies or retractions........even on here.
Neither sense of shame nor contrition; but still there is the bluster in the name of supporting the McCanns.
-
I believe you. &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
Neither your post nor Carew's post above mean a thing to me ... they are unintelligible to those not 'in the know' ... I don't even know if the use standard English would help ... I would recommend a try at using it though.
-
Neither your post nor Carew's post above mean a thing to me ... they are unintelligible to those not 'in the know' ... I don't even know if the use standard English would help ... I would recommend a try at using it though.
"Selective comprehension malfunction" can come in handy. 8)-)))
You challenged me for examples, Brietta...........I gave them.
Far too much information for me and most others, so hopefully the whole thread will go.......The sooner the better and we can get back to defending the parents of a missing child and chastising doubters which is what`s on the comfortable agenda, on the whole, isn`t it?
-
Sigh ... one does tend to get a flavour of the underlying personality from the style and the content of posts, imo.
The fact you feel it incumbent on yourself to make similar jibes to the one above in response to many of my posts has enabled me to make a fair assessment of you.
Is that an "attack"? I'll leave it for you to decide, but please don't murder some doggerel if you do.
That encompasses the whole point of my post luv as in forming an opinion of me on the basis of what Alice Purjorick posts on here is the second dozy idea you have had today.
I will not murder a doggerel but I may kick the cat.
-
"Selective comprehension malfunction" can come in handy. 8)-)))
You challenged me for examples, Brietta...........I gave them.
Far too much information for me and most others, so hopefully the whole thread will go.......The sooner the better and we can get back to defending the parents of a missing child and chastising doubters which is what`s on the comfortable agenda, on the whole, isn`t it?
You have made a handful of allegations (I think) in support of the claim made in the thread title.
If I started to cut and paste now the offensive remarks attacking whoever comes into the sights of the suspicious ones, I could keep it up indefinitely ... almost like perpetual motion ... and never be short of offensive material to post ... such is the predominance of it.
-
That encompasses the whole point of my post luv as in forming an opinion of me on the basis of what Alice Purjorick posts on here is the second dozy idea you have had today.
I will not murder a doggerel but I may kick the cat.
Well that was surely as clear as mud ... maybe you should find someone to play with who is capable of joining in the repartee ... it is all lost on me.
-
(It`s captured from brett, actually.)
There are others......worse, i.m.o. ..... because they name a specific ex-poster here under veiled threat from these "people" .......a mother with young children.......
" It will get its soon enough."
This material is still out there on view and as far as I know there have been no public apologies or retractions........even on here.
Neither sense of shame nor contrition; but still there is the bluster in the name of supporting the McCanns.
I don't recognise who or what you are referring to Carew, but I do know that a poster from here (wonderfulspam) posted that:-
---------------------
''All McCann supporters are creepy old paedophiles.
The evidence speaks for itself.''
-------------------------------------------------------
And that is just one example of his vile posts - there were plenty more just as offensive - which of course were quickly removed and so maybe not seen by many posters.
Are you surprised that people elsewhere who did see them were appalled and so commented?
-
Well that was surely as clear as mud ... maybe you should find someone to play with who is capable of joining in the repartee ... it is all lost on me.
Jolly good!
-
You have made a handful of allegations (I think) in support of the claim made in the thread title.
If I started to cut and paste now the offensive remarks attacking whoever comes into the sights of the suspicious ones, I could keep it up indefinitely ... almost like perpetual motion ... and never be short of offensive material to post ... such is the predominance of it.
Yes, I am quite sure you could post many yourself and yes, I have kept to the thread title.
What more should I have done?
First you imply that "attacks" possibly only exist in my "fevered imagination" and request examples, not generalisations.
I therefore supply specific copies of posts freely available out there for all to read.....and you maintain that you can`t understand the English.
Next is the inevitable stock riposte that you could do the same re attacks on the McCanns.
I know that.....but it misses the point.
Maybe just a simple acknowledgement that nasty threatening "attacks" on doubters do happen, rather than the denial you seem to put so much energy into?
I accept that it is difficult for those who grab the high moral ground for themselves to admit that their fellows can be every bit as nauseating as those they feel are their moral inferiors.
-
I don't recognise who or what you are referring to Carew, but I do know that a poster from here (wonderfulspam) posted that:-
---------------------
''All McCann supporters are creepy old paedophiles.
The evidence speaks for itself.''
-------------------------------------------------------
And that is just one example of his vile posts - there were plenty more just as offensive - which of course were quickly removed and so maybe not seen by many posters.
Are you surprised that people elsewhere who did see them were appalled and so commented?
Now it's McCann supporters on this forum who have allegedly called sceptics "paedophiles" according to the person who started this thread (and which was approved of by Admin!) Perhaps the OP thought Wonderfulspam was a McCann supporter, though they'd have to be a bit dense to come to that conclusion...?
-
Neither your post nor Carew's post above mean a thing to me ... they are unintelligible to those not 'in the know' ... I don't even know if the use standard English would help ... I would recommend a try at using it though.
Just try typing in what was given on google, and you will find those repulsive sites all too easily.
-
So you were there sadie and witnessed all these events ? &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
Got loads of pointers that you folk have never dreamt of. 8((()*/
-
I don't recognise who or what you are referring to Carew, but I do know that a poster from here (wonderfulspam) posted that:-
---------------------
''All McCann supporters are creepy old paedophiles.
The evidence speaks for itself.''
-------------------------------------------------------
And that is just one example of his vile posts - there were plenty more just as offensive - which of course were quickly removed and so maybe not seen by many posters.
Are you surprised that people elsewhere who did see them were appalled and so commented?
Well, yes I was "surprised" at the comments......( an understatement, actually!)
Weren`t you surprised, then?
Those who assume the high moral ground should not feel that responding in kind ..........or worse.........is appropriate.
Was it appropriate to respond by referring to posters here as "child rape enthusiasts?"
-
Just try typing in what was given on google, and you will find those repulsive sites all too easily.
It is prudent to pretend they are a figment of an overactive sceptics imagination if you are one of the faithful.
Finding out they [the sites referred to] actually exist would cause a serious overload I am sure.
-
It is prudent to pretend they are a figment of an overactive sceptics imagination if you are one of the faithful.
Finding out they [the sites referred to] actually exist would cause a serious overload I am sure.
A bit difficult if they use virtually identical names...
-
A bit difficult if they use virtually identical names...
Random occurrence; incorrectly translated; sometime words have two meanings; 8(0(*
-
Well, yes I was "surprised" at the comments......( an understatement, actually!)
Weren`t you surprised, then?
Those who assume the high moral ground should not feel that responding in kind ..........or worse.........is appropriate.
Was it appropriate to respond by referring to posters here as "child rape enthusiasts?"
Is it appropriate that a forum member here should give the impression that he is such a thing? Albeit he was probably joking (if you can call a comment about child rape a joke) but still, it does rather lower the tone don't you think?
-
Yes, I am quite sure you could and yes, I have kept to the thread title.
What more should I have done?
First you imply that "attacks" possibly only exist in my "fevered imagination" and request examples, not generalisations.
I therefore supply specific copies of posts freely available out there for all to read.....and you maintain that you can`t understand the English.
Next is the inevitable stock riposte that you could do the same re attacks on the McCanns.
I know that.....but it misses the point.
Maybe just a simple acknowledgement that nasty threatening "attacks" on doubters do happen, rather than the denial you seem to put so much energy into?
I accept that it is difficult for those who grab the high moral ground for themselves to admit that their fellows can be every bit as nauseating as those they feel are their moral inferiors.
Having read Benice's post I now understand exactly why I could not make head not tail of yours.
-
Having read Benice's post I now understand exactly why I could not make head not tail of yours.
Oh..........I reckon you can make "head and tail of it" all right............You just don`t like what`s been revealed about those you believe to be "morally superior".
i.m.o. of course.
Keep going though,......denial and rationalisation beckon and will win through for you in the end! 8(0(*
-
Got loads of pointers that you folk have never dreamt of. 8((()*/
So what.
Do pointers make prices for peeps ? 8)--))
-
Oh..........I reckon you can make "head and tail of it" all right............You just don`t like what`s been revealed about those you believe to be "morally superior".
i.m.o. of course.
Keep going though,......denial and rationalisation beckon and will win through in the end! 8(0(*
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
Oh..........I reckon you can make "head and tail of it" all right............You just don`t like what`s been revealed about those you believe to be "morally superior".
i.m.o. of course.
Keep going though,......denial and rationalisation beckon and will win through for you in the end! 8(0(*
What exactly do you think you have revealed? Can you explain?
-
What exactly do you think you have revealed? Can you explain?
The nature of the devout mccann supporters.
-
The nature of the devout mccann supporters.
Reading that post that Carew posted, the person is saying he/she is taking screen shots of someone supporting child rape, I fail to see why that is taken as attacking an anti, unless you can enlighten me.
-
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
Poor McCann luvvie Brietta can't find a single supporter who is nasty and vile to people who do not beleive the stranger abduction....Yeah Right!!
and doesn't under stand your English...Yeah Right all BS
-
Poor McCann luvvie Brietta can't find a single supporter who is nasty and vile to people who do not beleive the stranger abduction....Yeah Right!!
and doesn't under stand your English...Yeah Right all BS
You got it in one.
People like brietta seem to have a blind spot for the bloody obvious.
It must interfere with their mantra, that only nasty people don't believe the mccanns.
-
Just try typing in what was given on google, and you will find those repulsive sites all too easily.
Yes you will, Haverns, Missing Madeleine, Lazzerie lies in the sun, and a lot of facebook groups one led by a certain Hideho, not forgetting Amazon Stephen.
-
Is it appropriate that a forum member here should give the impression that he is such a thing? Albeit he was probably joking (if you can call a comment about child rape a joke) but still, it does rather lower the tone don't you think?
Well, quite and as a result of such tone-lowering, other forum members here were called "child rape enthusiasts".
The police and "CEOP" need to "look at them", apparently.
All quite right and proper in the world of McCann supporters, don`t ya know !
I mean, what else should those who claim monopoly of Sympathy and Empathy do with all this moral superiority?
Post this, of course.... ( names removed)
"Broho wrote: one of the things that thinks jokes about child rape are as funny as hell , that C........., has reported G......... .
the police and ceops need to be taking a look at them .
Is that right? The one with the name meaning love in Welsh? It will get its soon enough.
That is very disturbing. ISTR C.......... talking about doing the school run. The fact that she has children of her own is scary. "
-
Sounds a little unhinged to me.
-
Well, quite and as a result of such tone-lowering, other forum members here were called "child rape enthusiasts".
The police and "CEOP" need to "look at them", apparently.
All quite right and proper in the world of McCann supporters, don`t ya know !
I mean, what else should those who claim monopoly of Sympathy and Empathy do with all this moral superiority?
Post this, of course.... ( names removed)
"Broho wrote: one of the things that thinks jokes about child rape are as funny as hell , that C........., has reported G......... .
the police and ceops need to be taking a look at them .
Is that right? The one with the name meaning love in Welsh? It will get its soon enough.
That is very disturbing. ISTR C.......... talking about doing the school run. The fact that she has children of her own is scary. "
That is just the sort of thing I had posted to me Carew on that forum I was talking about.
Another was 'where is she, the p..do the school must be out' 'her children must be deformed she passes them around a pa.do ring'. 'She must be down the docks servicing' etc. etc.
-
Sounds a little unhinged to me.
lol quantify 'little' and the supporters are blissfullyunaware of this behaviour....*coughs* but then they find the ......... like Bennet and Co......cram us all in the same basket.
-
lol quantify 'little' and the supporters are blissfullyunaware of this behaviour....*coughs* but then they find the ......... like Bennet and Co......cram us all in the same basket.
Yeah, I should have said 'more than a little unhinged' Sound like basket cases.
Funny how we never hear about the activity of these trolls in the popular press.
-
Yes you will, Haverns, Missing Madeleine, Lazzerie lies in the sun, and a lot of facebook groups one led by a certain Hideho, not forgetting Amazon Stephen.
You are in denial, as many mccann supporters.
Like you heroes you can't admit some of your fellow supporters are nasty pieces of work.
Do you post on the mccann supporter sites perhaps ?
-
As has been pointed out before, there are some really nasty people on both 'sides'. Perhaps we can all accept that now. We should also acknowledge that most people on here aren't nasty or spiteful, we just happen to have different opinions. Debating the case is fine, attacking people for having a different opinion isn't.
-
That is just the sort of thing I had posted to me Carew on that forum I was talking about.
Another was 'where is she, the p..do the school must be out' 'her children must be deformed she passes them around a pa.do ring'. 'She must be down the docks servicing' etc. etc.
Yes, Lace, I thought that was probably what happened to you and from anywhere it is disgraceful.
The point was that people who doubt the McCanns do get "attacked" and threatened too.........as persons from this forum did and that`s what the thread is about.
Some supporters seem to want any excuse to target, threaten or simply ridicule someone......no better than their accusations of doubters ; whilst at the same time claiming the high moral ground for decency and compassion. That extreme nastiness is gratuitous and can`t be explained away as "defending the McCanns."
(I like what G Unit has just posted.........in a nutshell!)
-
As has been pointed out before, there are some really nasty people on both 'sides'. Perhaps we can all accept that now. We should also acknowledge that most people on here aren't nasty or spiteful, we just happen to have different opinions. Debating the case is fine, attacking people for having a different opinion isn't.
Agreed.
-
Poor McCann luvvie Brietta can't find a single supporter who is nasty and vile to people who do not beleive the stranger abduction....Yeah Right!!
and doesn't under stand your English...Yeah Right all BS
As soon as posters have to resort to ad hominem attacks, they have lost the argument.
Dommage.
-
Poor McCann luvvie Brietta can't find a single supporter who is nasty and vile to people who do not beleive the stranger abduction....Yeah Right!!
and doesn't under stand your English...Yeah Right all BS
Let me see now ... were I as thin skinned as some I might claim yours and Stephen's snide comments mentioning me by name but not including me in the conversation a form of bullying normally seen in the school playground ... how does that fit in with your concept that "suspicious" people are attacked? when you actually seem to be the ones employing bullying as an attack on me.
-
Let me see now ... were I as thin skinned as some I might claim yours and Stephen's snide comments mentioning me by name but not including me in the conversation a form of bullying normally seen in the school playground ... how does that fit in with your concept that "suspicious" people are attacked? when you actually seem to be the ones employing bullying as an attack on me.
Are you denying some mccann supporters behave appallingly ?
-
I'm still not clear who these appalling McCann supporters are, how many people we are talking about, where the post and what they have said about specifically whom which is so appalling. Perhaps a dossier is in order...?
-
I'm still not clear who these appalling McCann supporters are, how many people we are talking about, where the post and what they have said about specifically whom which is so appalling. Perhaps a dossier is in order...?
Have you not been kept in the "loop", then? 8)-)))
-
Another cull, glad we are not seals, goodnight :)
-
Have you not been kept in the "loop", then? 8)-)))
No, please fill me in, thanks in advance.
-
No, please fill me in, thanks in advance.
You`ll have to make do with what I`ve posted already, sorry.
Read through it again and despite the standard of English in the copied posts, which apparently caused some comprehension difficulties, I think you might eventually catch on.
-
Most posters are well aware of the less than helpful and onesided comments which have been made elsewhere and like me, after a while, best to simply ignore them. The last thing we need is those remarks being brought here and disseminated in detail.
In many cases the comments can be attributed to former banned members who obviously feel the need to be heard somewhere...anywhere.
Admin