I rarely agree with Katie Hopkins, but she has put her head above the parapet, and it will be interesting to see if others follow her lead.
'There is no amount of money the will right the wrongs of the past, no libel action that will cancel out the damage the McCanns inflicted on themselves.'
'Kate and Gerry McCann didn't deserve £11million of our cash to look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations. Others have greater need.'
'If you really must blame someone, then Kate and Gerry are right there in front of you. And yet, protected by some invisible force-shield I don’t understand.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40pSSgg8i
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Katie Hopkins!!! she only says things to cause a stir for everyone to look at her.
It's riddled with errors too. Silly woman
I rarely agree with Katie Hopkins, but she has put her head above the parapet, and it will be interesting to see if others follow her lead.
'There is no amount of money the will right the wrongs of the past, no libel action that will cancel out the damage the McCanns inflicted on themselves.'
'Kate and Gerry McCann didn't deserve £11million of our cash to look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations. Others have greater need.'
'If you really must blame someone, then Kate and Gerry are right there in front of you. And yet, protected by some invisible force-shield I don’t understand.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40pSSgg8i
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
It really makes you wonder why the Portuguese are pouring money down the pan, too, with their desperate financial situation. There's obviously no chance of them convicting the McCanns.
Cite the errors.
I rarely agree with Katie Hopkins, but she has put her head above the parapet, and it will be interesting to see if others follow her lead.
'There is no amount of money the will right the wrongs of the past, no libel action that will cancel out the damage the McCanns inflicted on themselves.'
'Kate and Gerry McCann didn't deserve £11million of our cash to look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations. Others have greater need.'
'If you really must blame someone, then Kate and Gerry are right there in front of you. And yet, protected by some invisible force-shield I don’t understand.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40pSSgg8i
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
It is interesting that the Mail, whose comments section is usually the most fiercely moderated, has allowed this opinion piece to be published.tide must be turning eh...? 8(0(*
It is interesting that the Mail, whose comments section is usually the most fiercely moderated, has allowed this opinion piece to be published.
Well you can have your fantasies of a return from nowhere by MADELEINE.It is not my fantasy to have, Stephen. It is a hope for Madeleine's loved ones.
However, Ms. Hopkins has hit it right on the head for a change.
It is not my fantasy to have, Stephen. It is a hope for Madeleine's loved ones.
Neither you nor Ms Hopkins have any real idea as to what all the money has been spent on to date.
We can only hope there is a positive resolution allowing the release of much of the longed-for information.
..and yet not one trace of her DESPITE THE ALMOST 9 YEAR WORLDWIDE PUBLICITY.
Sooner or later the mccann propaganda trail will come to an end.
Off the top of my head, Cuddle Cat was not washed after five days it was weeks later when it was filthy and it didn't smell of Madeleine.
Another is a very important one where she says the McCann's sat on the phto fit of Smith man for almost five years, they didn't it was given to the PJ. Does she know that a newspaper was sued for saying that?
Pathetic alfred, but par for the course from you.
So what did Ms. Hopkins get wrong in her critique of the mccanns ?
That they sat on the photo fit for almost five years, oh dear.
You'll really be at a loss then Stephen, what on earth will you do with your time.
Perhaps the woman who has spent much of the last 10 years smearing all & sundry is about to be brought crashing down in spectacular fashion.
Perhaps the woman who has spent much of the last 10 years smearing all & sundry is about to be brought crashing down in spectacular fashion.
Nope.
could well be....looks like easy money for CR
Can McCann still afford to retain them?Can Katie Hopkins afford to find out?
Can McCann still afford to retain them?
Interesting.....so she wanted to say what she thought but wasn't allowed? Will others now break their silence I wonder?
I have never been allowed to say this before.
I’ve been given all sorts of reasons — people who are normally brutally honest with me fobbing me off, arguing I am not bringing anything new to the debate
It’s been a white-out, like the silence of snow.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40plhNk2n
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
I suppose Hopkins thinks that women who are raped bear some of the blame too? Not the perpetrator. Of which there is no mention in her 'story'. On a recent, excellent BBC show (The Moral Maze) this woman admitted she doesn't spend any time thinking through her opinions.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40popF9sQ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
There seems to be an assumption that KH will not have taken legal advice prior to her pronouncements. To paraphrase some on here that doesn't make sense.
There seems to be an assumption that KH will not have taken legal advice prior to her pronouncements. To paraphrase some on here that doesn't make sense.
The McCanns go for the newspaper, not the journalist usually. Is the Mail taking a risk or is it confident about this story for some reason?
Well bearing in mind the Mail's support for the mccanns in the past, has it finally shifted it's grounds, now the 'fund' is decline.
Hopkins comments have gone viral on Twitter.
Well bearing in mind the Mail's support for the mccanns in the past, has it finally shifted it's grounds, now the 'fund' is decline.
Hopkins comments have gone viral on Twitter.
then that explains her reasons for writing the article.....I feel it will backfire
I suppose Hopkins thinks that women who are raped bear some of the blame too? Not the perpetrator. Of which there is no mention in her 'story'. On a recent, excellent BBC show (The Moral Maze) this woman admitted she doesn't spend any time thinking through her opinions.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40popF9sQ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Why are you quoting from the comments on her article? Was it your comment perchance?
the comments refers to a comment she made about herself....it is not my comment
It is a comment made by an anonymous person in the 'comments' section below the article. This anonymous person alleges that she admitted to something when she appeared on The Moral Maze'. Unless you heard the programme or have a transcript you are simply perpetuating a rumour.
this is a good line...
Maddie wasn’t lost because someone took her. She was lost because she was left to be found
so she says Maddie was not abducted...she will struggle to prove that in a libel court
I think you will struggle with that one.
explain how I will struggle
Some seem under the illusion that this will go to a libel court.
Mind you, that's all the mccanns are good for.
Certainly not taking proper care of their children in Portugal.
You have made an inference fro the sentence that you quoted that isn't there.
Excellent support for the article in the Mail comments.
There are a substantial number of right thinking people who support Hopkins in this.
wow stephen i woke p and saw katie got published in the daily mail im shocked and pleased!!!!!!
It's about time someone took a stand in the vpress against the sickly pro-mccann propaganda.
IMHO of course.
the daily mail is a worldwide online newspaper too
Indeed it is.
Likewise, so are the social media sites.
Grinding of teeth in Rothley Manor tonight. 8)-)))
It surprises me that the Mail allows comment on McCann articles, even if they are moderated.
It surprises me that the Mail allows comment on McCann articles, even if they are moderated.
maybe the daily mail staff have had enouggh of being controlled and censored?
maybe the daily mail staff have had enouggh of being controlled and censored?
They aren't the only ones in all likelihood.
They aren't the only ones in all likelihood.
i dont believe in censorship the mcanns are grown adults and bare responsibility for the events of that night
The McCann's have got away with having their own way far too long in the press.
So a lot of sour grapes from the supporters club tonight.
The McCann's have got away with having their own way far too long in the press.
So a lot of sour grapes from the supporters club tonight.
The McCann's have got away with having their own way far too long in the press.
So a lot of sour grapes from the supporters club tonight.
Actually, I think we're all quite enjoying the self-inflicted gun-shot wounds to the feet of Hall & Hopkins......
from the little i know about katie she wouldnt be bothered with what the mccans or supporters think @)(++(*
Actually, I think we're all quite enjoying the self-inflicted gun-shot wounds to the feet of Hall & Hopkins......
No she doesn't give a monkeys.
She has expressed her thanks to the Mail-on-line for supporting her in her article.
Best rated comment in favour of Hopkins...
6546 for
271 against.
Nice.
speaks volumes doesnt it the uk public doesnt live in fantasy land like mcann supporters
The McCanns can complain, threaten legal action and perhaps get another out of court settlement. All they will gain is money, however. Anyone who thinks that no mud will stick is in cloud cuckoo land. Ms Hopkins has said she hasn't been allowed to express her opinion. She has more or less said there has been a 'white out' on the McCann story. Everyone knew that, but now she's confirmed it. She's savagely attacked their childcare arrangements;
Too self-assured to hire a babysitter and too self-centred to care.
she says they don't deserve £11M of our cash to;
look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations.....The McCanns put their own children in harm’s way. Those kids were in danger. Because of their parents.
she would ask Kate McCann;
How did you leave the daughter you longed to have?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40qNE1fzt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The McCanns can complain, threaten legal action and perhaps get another out of court settlement. All they will gain is money, however. Anyone who thinks that no mud will stick is in cloud cuckoo land. Ms Hopkins has said she hasn't been allowed to express her opinion. She has more or less said there has been a 'white out' on the McCann story. Everyone knew that, but now she's confirmed it. She's savagely attacked their childcare arrangements;
Too self-assured to hire a babysitter and too self-centred to care.
she says they don't deserve £11M of our cash to;
look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations.....The McCanns put their own children in harm’s way. Those kids were in danger. Because of their parents.
she would ask Kate McCann;
How did you leave the daughter you longed to have?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40qNE1fzt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
The McCanns can complain, threaten legal action and perhaps get another out of court settlement. All they will gain is money, however. Anyone who thinks that no mud will stick is in cloud cuckoo land. Ms Hopkins has said she hasn't been allowed to express her opinion. She has more or less said there has been a 'white out' on the McCann story. Everyone knew that, but now she's confirmed it. She's savagely attacked their childcare arrangements;
Too self-assured to hire a babysitter and too self-centred to care.
she says they don't deserve £11M of our cash to;
look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations.....The McCanns put their own children in harm’s way. Those kids were in danger. Because of their parents.
she would ask Kate McCann;
How did you leave the daughter you longed to have?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40qNE1fzt
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
everything she said in the article is true
Katie hasn't been allowed to express her opinion before now? How come I have heard much worse from her on this subject many months ago? What does she imagine has changed?
katie has seen some articles by Kate and is trying to increase her stock...apprentice style by being controversial ...she has failed miserably and will pay the priceI'd have thought she'd have had more important things on her mind such as getting her claws into Cameron and urging us all to vote Out. Perhaps that's tomorrow's piece...?
katie hopskins isnt scared of the mcanns either is anybody else maybe it has sunk in to mcann supporters?
The irony is that KH herself had an unsavoury pop at stay-at-home mums last year. It seems her own idea of childcare is to leave it to someone/anyone else as long as she can work, sometimes leaving them for weeks at a time.yes, she's nothing if not an A grade hypocrite, gawd bless her.
yes, she's nothing if not an A grade hypocrite, gawd bless her.
If the McCann's are foolish enough to accuse her of libel, she isn't one for backing down.
I imagine you have seen a lot of C- in your life
You are the master of gay wit and repartee aren't you...
You are the master of gay wit and repartee aren't you...
She provided childcare.
She didn't go out to wine and dine, and leave her children unprotected.
DID SHE.
@)(++(*
why has this article upset mcann supporters so much is it because it is the truth?? and they know it
It has hit a raw nerve Carly.
also daily mail has been mcann supporters until now.........
Index.
The McCann's would be very foolish to go for another libel trial on very thin ground.
They have an ongoing case with Amaral, the funds are draining, and the near closer of the SY investigation to deal with.
you dont understand libel law...if the mccanns have a case CR will take it gratisNeither do you it seems.
As autoridades portuguesas ponderam reabrir o processo de desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann, na sequência da análise feita pela PJ do Porto ao longo dos últimos dois anos. A investigação deverá ficar a cargo da PJ de Faro e consistirá, para já, na inquirição de mais testemunhas. O Correio da Manhã sabe que a tese seguida será a de rapto e poderá haver diligências comuns às que foram pedidas pelos ingleses.
Na última semana o caso conheceu novos desenvolvimentos, principalmente com a divulgação do retrato robô do principal suspeito e a nova pista que, tudo aponta, deverá levar à reabertura do processo para saber o que aconteceu a Maddie na noite de 3 de Maio de 2007, na Praia da Luz.
The Portuguese authorities are considering reopening the disappearance of Madeleine McCann process , following the analysis by PJ Port over the past two years. Research should be borne by the PJ in Faro and will consist , for now, in the hearing of witnesses . The Correio da Manha know that the next argument will be the abduction and may be common to steps that were ordered by the British.
Last week the case met new developments , especially with the release of the picture robot of the main suspect and the new track that everything points , should lead to the reopening of the case to find out what happened to Maddie on the night of May 3, 2007 , Praia da Luz .
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/pj-quer-reabrir-caso-maddie.html
I don't think there is any doubt at all that the British and the Portuguese are investigating Madeleine's abduction.
Why people assume that they know better than the cops who benefit from having the expertise and all the intelligence and evidence amassed over the years and who have now trimmed it down to salient points which they are actively following, is indeed one of life's mysteries.
KATIE HOPKINS: We'll never know what really happened to Maddie but her parents should accept their share of the blame and let her go
(http://i.imgur.com/vXOx0hK.jpg?1)
21st February 2016
I have never been allowed to say this before.
I’ve been given all sorts of reasons — people who are normally brutally honest with me fobbing me off, arguing I am not bringing anything new to the debate
It’s been a white-out, like the silence of snow.
But seeing the faces of Gerry and Kate McCann yet again this week, promoting the Child Rescue Alert Campaign to track down missing kids, I think it's finally time to speak out.
Kate McCann says she lives in a never-ending limbo.
But I believe the truth is that Madeleine McCann is never coming home.
She is long gone. It is time to stop looking and stop imagining there is some happy ending to this sorry tale. Enough.
There is no amount of money the will right the wrongs of the past, no libel action that will cancel out the damage the McCanns inflicted on themselves.
Kate and Gerry McCann didn't deserve £11million of our cash to look for Maddie or try to resolve their consciences or salvage reputations. Others have greater need.
If you really must blame someone, then Kate and Gerry are right there in front of you. And yet, protected by some invisible force-shield I don’t understand.
Show me a family from a council estate who left their child alone to go out eating and drinking who have been lauded with such support and the protection of the state.
Last year, a father of a two year old was arrested and prosecuted after leaving his daughter in a car for two minutes whilst he ran in to a chemist to buy Calpol.
Even our British broadcaster was in on the act. A Crimewatch Special in 2013 featuring new photo-fits of Maddie’s abductor failed to acknowledge that the McCanns had been sitting on these pictures for nearly five years.
Pictures compiled by their own investigation team whose report they later hid from view when it pointed the finger of blame in a direction Gerry didn't enjoy.
They left their child in an unlocked ground-floor apartment next to two busy roads. Too self-assured to hire a babysitter and too self-centred to care.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40pSSgg8i
The 'best rated' comment on the Mail article, praising Katie Hopkin's opinion, now has over 9200 green approval arrows. Speaks volumes.What does the comment say and what does it mean that 9200 agree with it?
I must say I thought Katie Hopkins had stated something of consequence having read over the posts in this thread. However, having now read the original article I find it to be of little journalistic value and adds nothing to the debate. Do people actually get paid for writing this rubbish?
Writing, "But I believe the truth is that Madeleine McCann is never coming home" is opinion based on very little and certainly isn't anyone's truth. The same was said about other missing girls yet some of them came home years later. Madeleine might not be so lucky but then she just could be, who knows!
As autoridades portuguesas ponderam reabrir o processo de desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann, na sequência da análise feita pela PJ do Porto ao longo dos últimos dois anos. A investigação deverá ficar a cargo da PJ de Faro e consistirá, para já, na inquirição de mais testemunhas. O Correio da Manhã sabe que a tese seguida será a de rapto e poderá haver diligências comuns às que foram pedidas pelos ingleses.
Na última semana o caso conheceu novos desenvolvimentos, principalmente com a divulgação do retrato robô do principal suspeito e a nova pista que, tudo aponta, deverá levar à reabertura do processo para saber o que aconteceu a Maddie na noite de 3 de Maio de 2007, na Praia da Luz.
The Portuguese authorities are considering reopening the disappearance of Madeleine McCann process , following the analysis by PJ Port over the past two years. Research should be borne by the PJ in Faro and will consist , for now, in the hearing of witnesses . The Correio da Manha know that the next argument will be the abduction and may be common to steps that were ordered by the British.
Last week the case met new developments , especially with the release of the picture robot of the main suspect and the new track that everything points , should lead to the reopening of the case to find out what happened to Maddie on the night of May 3, 2007 , Praia da Luz .
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/pj-quer-reabrir-caso-maddie.html
I don't think there is any doubt at all that the British and the Portuguese are investigating Madeleine's abduction.
Why people assume that they know better than the cops who benefit from having the expertise and all the intelligence and evidence amassed over the years and who have now trimmed it down to salient points which they are actively following, is indeed one of life's mysteries.
What was more important than anything in the article, was that someone had for the first time in several years actually questioned the mccanns, and dared to put the blame for this case where it firmly and truly belongs.
As to 'writing rubbish' John, have seen you read the rubbish written in the tabloids last week as regards the mccanns. A sob story which had no real content, but repeated for several days in a row.
Personally, I can't stand Hopkins, but the comments sections, which is still there, SPEAKS VOLUMES.
It has hit a raw nerve Carly.
Your uncritical endorsement of Hopkins and the fact that you read the daily mail explains many things Stephen. &%+((£
if you read the comments sections rather than just looking at the numbers you will see that people do not agree with the decision to leave the children in the apartment....not that all these people think the mccanns dunnit
Supporters have argued for years that leaving three small children alone in an unlocked apartment was not a bad decision. It would seem their opinions are not widely shared.Some supporters may have argued that, but the majority have acknowledged the foolishness of their decision. I would also acknowledge that many, many people despise the McCanns and enjoy (even nearly 10 years later) constantly rebuking them for their poor decision. It's almost a national sport I would say.
What was more important than anything in the article, was that someone had for the first time in several years actually questioned the mccanns, and dared to put the blame for this case where it firmly and truly belongs.
As to 'writing rubbish' John, have seen you read the rubbish written in the tabloids last week as regards the mccanns. A sob story which had no real content, but repeated for several days in a row.
Personally, I can't stand Hopkins, but the comments sections, which is still there, SPEAKS VOLUMES.
Supporters have argued for years that leaving three small children alone in an unlocked apartment was not a bad decision. It would seem their opinions are not widely shared.
well said Katie Hopkins
i dont see how posters can think she wont get away with what she has wrote ...
yet quite happy for the mccs to get away with what they have done
after all ...she is only highlighting the neglect etc etc ....
interesting ..............If she was never allowed to say these things before does that mean something has changed
seems like the mccs are passing there sell by date...
It's not so much that she gets away with what she wrote but what she wrote. Claiming that, "We'll never know what really happened to Maddie" is a nonsense and frankly a very poor show for someone who claims to be a professional journalist. It is this sort of garbage which perpetuates so many myths in the case.Come on John, she's not a professional journalist, she's a professional troll and shit-stirrer and rent-a-gob, nothing more.
Come on John, she's not a professional journalist, she's a professional troll and shit-stirrer and rent-a-gob, nothing more.
It's not so much that she gets away with what she wrote but what she wrote. Claiming that, "We'll never know what really happened to Maddie" is a nonsense and frankly a very poor show for someone who claims to be a professional journalist. It is this sort of garbage which perpetuates so many myths in the case.
The one thing I do agree with Hopkins in though is that Kate's involvement with the Child Rescue Alert Campaign is inappropriate.
Come on John, she's not a professional journalist, she's a professional troll and shit-stirrer and rent-a-gob, nothing more.
the thing for me though is ....professional or not ....
she is now feeling safe to comment when before she wasn't .... there is quite a few things mentioned in that article...there may be more to come .
Come on John, she's not a professional journalist, she's a professional troll and shit-stirrer and rent-a-gob, nothing more.
the thing for me though is ....professional or not ....
she is now feeling safe to comment when before she wasn't .... there is quite a few things mentioned in that article...there may be more to come .
Come on John, she's not a professional journalist, she's a professional troll and shit-stirrer and rent-a-gob, nothing more.
Interesting that the Mail should run a McCann sob story earlier today (or yesterday) and then follow on the this one by Hopkins.
I see this article is still on line, despite predictions that it would soon be pulled.
Does anyone know if it has appeared in the print version?
Why does she think she has the right to tell the McCann's to stop looking for their child?
It's not so much that she gets away with what she wrote but what she wrote. Claiming that, "We'll never know what really happened to Maddie" is a nonsense and frankly a very poor show for someone who claims to be a professional journalist. It is this sort of garbage which perpetuates so many myths in the case.
The one thing I do agree with Hopkins in though is that Kate's involvement with the Child Rescue Alert Campaign is inappropriate given the fog which still hangs over the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Couldn't agree more, in fact I would put it stronger...what a bloody cheek she has!
What about the McCann's claims there is no poroof that Madeleine has come to harm.
As to Ms. Hopkins claim that the truth of what happened to Madeleine will never emerge.
More than likely, it seems.
As you yourself point out every day infinitum, crime undetermined as yet.
As you yourself point out every day infinitum, crime undetermined as yet. There is no proof she has come to harm, similarly, there is no proof she is alive. The McCanns publicly state they have hope she is still alive and will one day come home. What they privately believe however is a matter for them.
Some supporters may have argued that, but the majority have acknowledged the foolishness of their decision. I would also acknowledge that many, many people despise the McCanns and enjoy (even nearly 10 years later) constantly rebuking them for their poor decision. It's almost a national sport I would say.
As you yourself point out every day infinitum, crime undetermined as yet. There is no proof she has come to harm, similarly, there is no proof she is alive. The McCanns publicly state they have hope she is still alive and will one day come home. What they privately believe however is a matter for them.
The way I read what she said is that people were putting her off posting what she thought, and for good reason in my opinion. Not that there was some secret goings on that stopped her, that's just conspiracy stupidity.
Couldn't agree more, the only reason she has opened her mouth is for attention, she knows it will stir things up and that is the only reason she has said these things. The Mail also knows this and that it will sell papers.
Most of the comments are because most people think it was wrong to have left the children alone, most of them probably don't really follow the case and that is all that sticks in their minds, hence you get the green arrows.
What really annoys me though is that she has obviously not been following the case, she mentions the photo fit and says the McCann's sat on it for almost five years, which is a complete lie.
Then at the end she goes on that the McCann's were callous enough to wash CC after only five days, another lie, but it gets the people 'on her side' this sort of thing is what really gets me, the woman is a sly shit stirrer for want of a better word.
This woman also says 'the McCann's don't deserve 11 million pounds' so it is how a child is lost that gets you money to search for that child is it? Madeleine had no say in how she was left, the 11 million spent was to find Madeleine, so the stupid woman is speaking a load of nasty bile again.
Why does she think she has the right to tell the McCann's to stop looking for their child?
I'm no fan of Ms Hopkins but she has had the guts to depart from the official line toed by all the 'proper' journalists. She has had the guts to divulge that negative stories have not been allowed. She has had the guts to highlight the neglectful behaviour of the parents which other 'proper' journalists have excused. She got a couple of details wrong, but so did all the 'proper' journalists.
I'm no fan of Ms Hopkins but she has had the guts to depart from the official line toed by all the 'proper' journalists. She has had the guts to divulge that negative stories have not been allowed. She has had the guts to highlight the neglectful behaviour of the parents which other 'proper' journalists have excused. She got a couple of details wrong, but so did all the 'proper' journalists.
exactly 8@??)(
Couldn't agree more, the only reason she has opened her mouth is for attention, she knows it will stir things up and that is the only reason she has said these things. The Mail also knows this and that it will sell papers.
Most of the comments are because most people think it was wrong to have left the children alone, most of them probably don't really follow the case and that is all that sticks in their minds, hence you get the green arrows.
What really annoys me though is that she has obviously not been following the case, she mentions the photo fit and says the McCann's sat on it for almost five years, which is a complete lie.
Then at the end she goes on that the McCann's were callous enough to wash CC after only five days, another lie, but it gets the people 'on her side' this sort of thing is what really gets me, the woman is a sly shit stirrer for want of a better word.
This woman also says 'the McCann's don't deserve 11 million pounds' so it is how a child is lost that gets you money to search for that child is it? Madeleine had no say in how she was left, the 11 million spent was to find Madeleine, so the stupid woman is speaking a load of nasty bile again.
Why does she think she has the right to tell the McCann's to stop looking for their child?
I wonder if Carter Ruck will find anything in the article
Certainly hope so
I'm no fan of Ms Hopkins but she has had the guts to depart from the official line toed by all the 'proper' journalists. She has had the guts to divulge that negative stories have not been allowed. She has had the guts to highlight the neglectful behaviour of the parents which other 'proper' journalists have excused. She got a couple of details wrong, but so did all the 'proper' journalists.
It's an offensive piece.
But (I think) it just about stays the side of the libel laws (as amended by the new defence of 'honest comment') to keep Hopkins out of the law-courts (unfortunately).
The piece bangs the 'neglect' drum but doesn't, directly, accuse them of responsibility for harming Madeleine.
Objectionable, but within the law (I think) ....
While the McCanns released many efits themselves, indeed Kate had a selection of them in her book, they decided that ,it could be argued, the most pertinent efits were left unseen by the public. So yes I t could be argued that they did indeed sit on them for 5 years.
As to the cuddlecat comment I think the point KH was trying to make is that she would never have washed the smell of her daughter from the toy, sun cream-smeared or not.
Offensive in your eyes.
What a surprise.
that's just conspiracy stupidity.
well you read it wrong .....iyo
its called gagging.....the threat of lible
After 3 months of clutching it in hot and sweaty hands, even sun cream is unlikely to have been the dominant smell.
It isn't about guts it's using a tragedy to try and raise her own profile
She should have done some proper research before writing such an articl
I hope it backfires on her
So who is gagging her now exactly?
I'm no fan of Ms Hopkins but she has had the guts to depart from the official line toed by all the 'proper' journalists. She has had the guts to divulge that negative stories have not been allowed. She has had the guts to highlight the neglectful behaviour of the parents which other 'proper' journalists have excused. She got a couple of details wrong, but so did all the 'proper' journalists.
i think katie has alot of courage too speak out like she has the mcanns and supporters clearly dont like it though
xtina i think it took alot of guts for the daily mail uk to publish it and see that katie has the right to an opinion also to me katie wouldnt be scared of the mcanns or their supporters
no one because like it or not she has a right to an opinion
So who is gagging her now exactly?
i know she mentions quite a bit ....so it shows she isn't ...carlymichelle
i would love to be a fly on the wall at rothly manor today...
it seems there is nothing the mccs can do about it .....or they are skint ...
even the twins want maddie back story ...seems to have fell on deaf ears..
the majority of people now are sick to the back teeth of the mccs ......and there pathetic stories...
its about time they reaped what they sowed ....they have no one to blame but themselves...and it has always been sickening .....how they think more of themselves ...,.than what they did
@)(++(*.thats the whole point .no one ...
i know she mentions quite a bit ....so it shows she isn't ...carlymichelle
i would love to be a fly on the wall at rothly manor today...
it seems there is nothing the mccs can do about it .....or they are skint ...
even the twins want maddie back story ...seems to have fell on deaf ears..
the majority of people now are sick to the back teeth of the mccs ......and there pathetic stories...
its about time they reaped what they sowed ....they have no one to blame but themselves...and it has always been sickening .....how they think more of themselves ...,.than what they did
Which really rules out xtina's reply as to why she hasn't spoken out before.
@)(++(* i bet kate and gerry are in a rage and find this hurtful and unhelpful not to mention ludicrious
well obviously you know what you are on about .....because i don't .... 8**8:/:
Then perhaps she could have found something else to use as a 'prop '
@)(++(*.thats the whole point .no one ..
Katie Hopkins said she couldn't speak out before, I said it was because she was being told by people who know her not to, you posted that it had more to do with libel and gagging.
Well carly says she has a right to her opinion.
I should imagine the McCann's are treating her spite fest with the contempt it deserves.
Majority of people? you mean the Katie Hopkins fan club?
Reaped what they sowed, what does that mean exactly? by not having Madeleine back?
Back to the 'think more about themselves' well if wanting the investigation opened, during charity runs, bike rides, promoting missing children is thinking more about themselves then bring it on.
the internet has always been a thorn in the mcanns and supporters side imo
bring what on .....they deserve all they get ....promoting missing children ...when they never even bothered looking for there own..maddie
charity runs ....bike rides ....they do that for the fund babe....not maddie.
.
It must be truly heart-warming for Ms. Hopkins children to learn that their own mother would give up on them in similar circumstances.
Heaven knows what stick they'll take in the playground (yet again).
The woman is a licensed child abuser.
That is just stupid, you said she wouldn't say what she wanted to say because she was being gagged, well she did say what she wanted to say didn't she, so she wasn't being gagged at all.
Yep. That's it, Kids. If you ever get abducted don't be looking for any hoping or searching from me. Poor children. They will know from the word go that Mummy has moved on.
So when did you search for Madeleine Eleanor ?
I do it all of the time, Stephen. I am not entirely sure that Madeleine isn't in France.
But If Katie Hopkins wants to give up on abducted children, including her own, then that's up to her.
She didn't say that, did she.
She employs childcare, unlike the mccanns.
Paid childcare seems the way these days.
I do it all of the time, Stephen. I am not entirely sure that Madeleine isn't in France.
But If Katie Hopkins wants to give up on abducted children, including her own, then that's up to her.
She certainly has some controversial opinions.
- Do Christians here find it acceptable to call herself the "new Jesus"?
- Or to mock people with disabilities?
Katie Hopkins says she is the ‘new Jesus’ – and refuses to apologise for controversial comments
The outspoken columnist said she is leading the way to push "back the walls closing in on freedom of speech"
Emma Powell
Tuesday 13 October 2015
1 comment
(...)
The outspoken columnist gave a speech at the Church and the Media conference in London where she told audience members that she is “leading the way” against the intolerance of the liberal left.
"I'm Jesus of the outspoken,” she said. “Jesus had his followers – I have 600,000 followers on Twitter. It’s about leading the way – I am the new Jesus."
She described herself as “brave” and told the audience that she is “pushing back the walls closing in on freedom of speech”.
(...)
http://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-says-she-is-the-new-jesus-and-refuses-to-apologise-for-controversial-comments-a3089916.html
...
"When someone with your public profile tells others it’s okay to mock people with disabilities, you cause great damage."
Hawking, whose son has autism, added: "To be honest, I don’t really care what happens to you. But I do care what happens to people with disabilities and their families, and I care that you are making difficult lives even more challenging. Please stop."
Earlier today, presenter Lorraine Kelly revealed she would not let the reality TV star on her show.
Last updated Fri 1 May 2015
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-05-01/katie-hopkins-is-damaging-to-disabled-people-says-hawking/
i think you might find....its not so much people would give up ....
its the fact ..they don't believe in the abduction ...
She certainly has some controversial opinions.
- Do Christians here find it acceptable to call herself the "new Jesus"?
- Or to mock people with disabilities?
Katie Hopkins says she is the ‘new Jesus’ – and refuses to apologise for controversial comments
The outspoken columnist said she is leading the way to push "back the walls closing in on freedom of speech"
Emma Powell
Tuesday 13 October 2015
1 comment
(...)
The outspoken columnist gave a speech at the Church and the Media conference in London where she told audience members that she is “leading the way” against the intolerance of the liberal left.
"I'm Jesus of the outspoken,” she said. “Jesus had his followers – I have 600,000 followers on Twitter. It’s about leading the way – I am the new Jesus."
She described herself as “brave” and told the audience that she is “pushing back the walls closing in on freedom of speech”.
(...)
http://www.standard.co.uk/showbiz/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-says-she-is-the-new-jesus-and-refuses-to-apologise-for-controversial-comments-a3089916.html
...
"When someone with your public profile tells others it’s okay to mock people with disabilities, you cause great damage."
Hawking, whose son has autism, added: "To be honest, I don’t really care what happens to you. But I do care what happens to people with disabilities and their families, and I care that you are making difficult lives even more challenging. Please stop."
Earlier today, presenter Lorraine Kelly revealed she would not let the reality TV star on her show.
Last updated Fri 1 May 2015
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-05-01/katie-hopkins-is-damaging-to-disabled-people-says-hawking/
I disagree.
The people with "guts" are those who face terminal illness with dignity and forbearance, people who face living with appalling injuries, people who go into dangerous situations to help others have "guts"
She sits at a keyboard spewing out her intolerance, nastiness and bigoted views. The woman is seen as a loud-mouthed , shrill voiced, opinionated, intolerant woman by a great number of the British public.
She is certainly not my idea of a woman with "guts".
The Evening Standard has picked up on Hopkins' Mail article.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/katie-hopkins-sparks-online-frenzy-with-attack-on-madeleine-mccanns-parents-a3185856.html
Frenzy is the right word. It is like a Taz convention in here.
I do it all of the time, Stephen. I am not entirely sure that Madeleine isn't in France.
But If Katie Hopkins wants to give up on abducted children, including her own, then that's up to her.
i think you might find....its not so much people would give up ....
its the fact ..they don't believe in the abduction ...
I dread to think what her opinion of Ben Needham's mother is. How many years has she been living in hope that she might one day find her son? 24/25yrs ?
She also fails to notice that if it wasn't for the money spent on Madeleine's case - the chances of £700,000 being allocated to our police to look into Ben's disappearance were slim to zero IMO.
It would have been nice if Kerry Needham had got help without the government having to be shamed into it though, wouldn't it?
So how do you think Katie Hopkins would feel about not being believed if such a thing should ever happen to her?
However, she certainly appears to believe that Madeleine was abducted. How do you feel about that.
It would have been nice if Kerry Needham had got help without the government having to be shamed into it though, wouldn't it?
I totally agree G - and if SY decided to spend the same kind of money on Ben as they have on Madeleine - I for one would be delighted.
However it cannot be denied IMO -- that it was only because of the investigation into Madeleine's case - that £700,000 was allocated to Ben. And surely that has to be a good thing.
Obviously Katie Hopkins would not agree - preferring to just give up on her children - and move on with her life.
So how do you think Katie Hopkins would feel about not being believed if such a thing should ever happen to her
short answer.................i doubt she will ever have to
However, she certainly appears to believe that Madeleine was abducted. How do you feel about that.
short answer again...she had to be a bit carefull
other than that .....the point about all this ....is why now all of a sudden ....are the mccs not being protected ....against those of us who have minds of our own
will not have our intelligence insulted ....about being fed the abduction theory all the time....
So how do you think Katie Hopkins would feel about not being believed if such a thing should ever happen to her?
However, she certainly appears to believe that Madeleine was abducted. How do you feel about that.
katie is having surgery today maybe this is why she finally publised her thoughts she has more to worry about then what the mcans and supporters think of her
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3458287/KATIE-HOPKINS-Today-surgeons-cut-brain-try-cure-epilepsy.html
I don't think that's strictly true G. Many people who - even though they wouldn't have done the same themselves - believe the McCanns made a human error - but also maintain that the only criminal here is the person who took Madeleine.
Of course those people who have the done the same as the McCanns themselves will obviously have a different attitude towards the Listening method of childcare than those who would never contemplate employing it in the first place.
It's a matter of choice for individual parents.
IMO
To err is human, to blame others shows management potential.
What exactly was it that rattled Ms Hopkins cage to precipitate her self promoting mean spirited outburst this time?
Let me think back to the beginning ...
Got it!!!!
The mother of a missing child is doing something worthwhile and is spearheading a registration initiative funded by the Royal Mail for people to register to receive alerts in the event of a child going missing.
Her motivation and the driving force behind her involvement is the thought that had there been such a scheme in operation when her child went missing, her story might have had a different ending.
I have Googled a bit about Ms Hopkins career.
I have located a lot of negative and downright nasty comments emanating from her, most of which are designed to promote Ms Hopkins and denigrate just about everything under the sun ... as long as it creates a stir.
One of the penalties of living in an age where those with nothing better to do have been bedazzled by so called reality TV and its 'stars'.
I have seen nothing about any positive action she may have taken on behalf of any other than herself.
It says so much that to some she is a bona fide heroine to those who quite obviously wish the search for Madeleine McCann to be shut down.
For anyone in the United Kingdom who may wish to register and receive alerts on missing children, please text HERO and your postcode to 85080.
Registration costs a standard network text message rate.
It is completely free to sign up at www.childrescuealert.org.uk
Maybe what she has said an is opinion held by many other people and one you don't want to hear.
Maybe what she has said an is opinion held by many other people and one you don't want to hear.
We have heard it all before, Stephen. Many times.
But I thought the consensus of opinion was that The Government were shamed into helping The McCanns. Am I wrong about that?
David Cameron and Teresa May were allegedly 'persuaded' by Rebecca Brooks.
What exactly was it that rattled Ms Hopkins cage to precipitate her self promoting mean spirited outburst this time?
Let me think back to the beginning ...
Got it!!!!
The mother of a missing child is doing something worthwhile and is spearheading a registration initiative funded by the Royal Mail for people to register to receive alerts in the event of a child going missing.
Her motivation and the driving force behind her involvement is the thought that had there been such a scheme in operation when her child went missing, her story might have had a different ending.
I have Googled a bit about Ms Hopkins career.
I have located a lot of negative and downright nasty comments emanating from her, most of which are designed to promote Ms Hopkins and denigrate just about everything under the sun ... as long as it creates a stir.
One of the penalties of living in an age where those with nothing better to do have been bedazzled by so called reality TV and its 'stars'.
I have seen nothing about any positive action she may have taken on behalf of any other than herself.
It says so much that to some she is a bona fide heroine to those who quite obviously wish the search for Madeleine McCann to be shut down.
For anyone in the United Kingdom who may wish to register and receive alerts on missing children, please text HERO and your postcode to 85080.
Registration costs a standard network text message rate.
It is completely free to sign up at www.childrescuealert.org.uk
Thank you Brietta
slightly off topic, perhaps, but a good illustration of Hopkins dedication to the facts and the truth in her pursuit of "free speech" is her allegation towards Jack Monroe, who she accused of vandalising a war memorial. She had in fact confused Jack Monroe with a journalist called Laurie Penny. Ooops!
And of course an apology was somewhat beneath her. I gather JM is now suing her for £50k.
And Hopkins being as nasty as she obviously is makes it all the more surprising how many members of the public are actually supporting her in this.
The self-promoting controversial Ms Hopkins who thrives on dissent has shot herself in the foot this time then. Her latest rant has brought her huge public support instead of vilification. Whoops!Don't worry, she be back to being universally hated the next time she sneers at children's corpses being washed up on Turkish beaches.
And Hopkins being as nasty as she obviously is makes it all the more surprising how many members of the public are actually supporting her in this.
The self-promoting controversial Ms Hopkins who thrives on dissent has shot herself in the foot this time then. Her latest rant has brought her huge public support instead of vilification. Whoops!
i think its more they that they don't believe the abduction ...they are supporting ...not K H
KH is obviously supporting The Abduction. Or haven't her fans cottoned on?
A bit of a leap of logic there. She is criticising the McCs or leaving the kids, she doesn't appear to have put forward a theory as to what happened.
KH is obviously supporting The Abduction. Or haven't her fans cottoned on?
She said that they left Madeleine to be found. Found by who, do you think?
i think what you haven't cottoned on to ..is all the other stuff she has mentioned
i think even you must realise ...she has dared to to tell the mccs what she thinks of them ....and got away with it ...
not so much a fan of hers .....but applaud ..she had the bottle to do it ...
well you don't know who.....or what state maddie was in when they found her ....not necessarily abductor ...
that could mean all sorts of things ....how do you know she was even alive when found ....you don't do you.
i think what you haven't cottoned on to ..is all the other stuff she has mentioned
i think even you must realise ...she has dared to to tell the mccs what she thinks of them ....and got away with it ...
not so much a fan of hers .....but applaud ..she had the bottle to do it ...
I wouldn't bank on her getting away with it if I were you. But we have heard it all before, so hardly ground breaking.
A bottle of what?
I wouldn't bank on her getting away with it if I were you. But we have heard it all before, so hardly ground breaking.
WE have, but has the wider readership of the DM heard it before? They certainly have now.
A bottle of what?
well we will see....it obviously bothers you more than it does me ....
the abduction ...is the biggest bore...and the mccs
I wouldn't bank on her getting away with it if I were you. But we have heard it all before, so hardly ground breaking.
i think what you haven't cottoned on to ..is all the other stuff she has mentioned
i think even you must realise ...she has dared to to tell the mccs what she thinks of them ....and got away with it ...
not so much a fan of hers .....but applaud ..she had the bottle to do it ...
Getting away with what exactly ?
Well to the discerning eye, the mccanns have got away with child neglect.
They've heard that Prince Phillip had loads of affairs and hated The Queen Mother. No doubt equally fascinating.
You probably actually do consider yourself more discerning than the Portuguese prosecutors ....
LOL ... Katie Hopkins is a Wind Up Merchant of the first order who in my opinion dares to do what is best for Katie Hopkin's and Katie Hopkin's bank balance.
The more she winds up the gullible to make her seem 'controversial' must obviously be seen as a selling point by someone somewhere or she simply wouldn't do it and maybe have to work out another way of earning a crust with little effort.
There is always an audience somewhere worth pandering to for the purpose of manipulation (no 'cause' or higher ideal than the next pay cheque) ... there are always those too blind to realise they are being used.
She really is quite an operator. Diversification and changing headlines means she can insult swathes of opinion without fear of repetition and thus maintain her media 'persona'.
All without having to make much of an effort to 'earn' a crust.
We have heard it all before, Stephen. Many times.
In a newspaper? I must have missed that.
It's brought fairly high decibels of noise from a (thankfully small) number of vociferous McCann-detractors.
I guess Ms Hopkins regards that as a triumph.
She and Sonia Poulton were made for each other ....
KH is obviously supporting The Abduction. Or haven't her fans cottoned on?LOL. I wondered if they'd spotted that, obv. not.
Just think back to those good old Mirror Forum days ?{)(**
Most of the shrieks of outrage are being emitted by those who support the McCann story imo. None of them are addressing what she said, they are googling madly to find stories to discredit the woman. Attack the messenger, not the message as usual I guess.
LOL. I wondered if they'd spotted that, obv. not.
LOL. I wondered if they'd spotted that, obv. not.
isn't that off topic........or is it do as i say .......not as i do
She 'rattles my cage' not one bit ... I haven't been taken in by her. Can you give just one instance when Ms Hopkins has shown any self restraint in 'speaking out' about anyone or anything she thinks may add to her notoriety.
There is a market and an audience for those who wish to spew bile against Madeleine and the McCann family ... Ms Hopkins has merely tapped into it.
I know what she said. Madeleine was Abducted.
sounds here like she is pointing out about the g mcc ...lookalike
Even our British broadcaster was in on the act. A Crimewatch Special in 2013 featuring new photo-fits of Maddie’s abductor failed to acknowledge that the McCanns had been sitting on these pictures for nearly five years.
Pictures compiled by their own investigation team whose report they later hid from view when it pointed the finger of blame in a direction Gerry didn't enjoy.
They left their child in an unlocked ground-floor apartment next to two busy roads. Too self-assured to hire a babysitter and too self-centred to care.
She 'rattles my cage' not one bit ... I haven't been taken in by her. Can you give just one instance when Ms Hopkins has shown any self restraint in 'speaking out' about anyone or anything she thinks may add to her notoriety.
There is a market and an audience for those who wish to spew bile against Madeleine and the McCann family ... Ms Hopkins has merely tapped into it.
Well that's a lie. One that cost The Times.
[/quote
well that's what she wrote.........so she obviously is not bothered
In your totally biased opinion, as normal.
There appear to be those who think Ms Hopkins is valiant for 'speaking out' and not merely opportunistic. A heroine of our time indeed.
There is no evidence that Ms Hopkins has been prevented from speaking out about anything ... just pressing another button in the litany which she knows will go down well with her target audience.
Ms Hopkins appears to share your opinion when she says ..."Now the faces I associate with neglect are being used to promote the Child Rescue Alert campaign ... ".
A very brave and heroic statement indeed. However it does raise the question about what endeavour Ms Hopkins has ever undertaken to promote any good cause or what campaigns she can be associated with which are designed to help others?
She is entitled to her opinion ... she is entitled to make money out voicing those opinions if she can get away with it and obviously she can ... I am entitled to think she is less venal than those who swallow her pronouncements without bothering to think them through.
. The primary message from the article is that it is not a good idea to leave children as the McCanns did
Probably not the primary message they are taking from the article.
You can wax lyrical until the end of time.
The comments section in the Mail and the poll in the Standard will please the mccanns. 8)--))
You can wax lyrical until the end of time.
The comments section in the Mail and the poll in the Standard will please the mccanns. 8)--))
the anti McCann comments are cruel and totally unnecessary
I would be a very strange person indeed if I thought that jumping on to a bandwagon for the express purpose of venting my spleen on an innocent couple who have suffered unimaginable trauma is the right and appropriate thing to do.
I don't take pleasure in kangaroo courts and have a very low opinion of their memberships or those who promote them.
Which is probably why I do not share your opinion of the comments made by Ms Hopkins nor the ants nest she has stirred in making them.
Just a tawdry diversion from all that is really important in Madeleine McCann's case.
i think what you haven't cottoned on to ..is all the other stuff she has mentioned
i think even you must realise ...she has dared to to tell the mccs what she thinks of them ....and got away with it ...
not so much a fan of hers .....but applaud ..she had the bottle to do it ...
Of course she got away with it.
(I think!) English libel laws (as they are now couched) allow her to get away with it.
But even if there was a question mark (over whether Ms Hopkins has transgressed the laws of libel, or whether she hasn't) do you really think she has produced a piece to be proud of?
I would be a very strange person indeed if I thought that jumping on to a bandwagon for the express purpose of venting my spleen on an innocent couple who have suffered unimaginable trauma is the right and appropriate thing to do.
I don't take pleasure in kangaroo courts and have a very low opinion of their memberships or those who promote them.
Which is probably why I do not share your opinion of the comments made by Ms Hopkins nor the ants nest she has stirred in making them.
Just a tawdry diversion from all that is really important in Madeleine McCann's case.
Of course not, they're all too busy frothing with glee at the fact that someone said something nasty about the McCanns in a national newspaper - what a total and utter victory for the [ censored word ]s, this has got their year off to a stupendous start, bless them.
Probably not the primary message they are taking from the article.
Well she doesn't seem to be expecting an arrest or a child being found anytime soon;So what? Neither am I. What's your point?
We are not the police. We cannot pretend to know what really went on.
What happened that night will remain a mystery and someone will take the truth to their grave
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz40uoe1FB0
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
There is a nugget of sense in Katie's article and it is this:
We are not the police. We cannot pretend to know what really went on.
And yet we are all guilty of doing just that, including Katie herself. Now, if everybody just kept their opinions to themselves regarding what they think went on and let the police get on with it, how would the world be a worse place exactly?
Tell that to Colin Stagg...Why would I want to tell that to Colin Stagg exactly?
She 'rattles my cage' not one bit ... I haven't been taken in by her. Can you give just one instance when Ms Hopkins has shown any self restraint in 'speaking out' about anyone or anything she thinks may add to her notoriety.
There is a market and an audience for those who wish to spew bile against Madeleine and the McCann family ... Ms Hopkins has merely tapped into it.
Please give examples of people "spewing bile against Madeleine".I do recall a discussion about Madeleine on one of the "sceptic" sites in which her looks were pulled apart, something to the effect of "it's probably just as well she's dead otherwise she'd have grown up to look just like her Dad, poor kid". I'm sure there's been other stuff too,
Why would I want to tell that to Colin Stagg exactly?
You really can't comprehend why people don't believe the mccanns story or are just sick to the teeth of them playing 'poor me' in the papers.
I suggest you go out into the real world and find out.
It might be enlightening.
There is a nugget of sense in Katie's article and it is this:
We are not the police. We cannot pretend to know what really went on.
And yet we are all guilty of doing just that, including Katie herself. Now, if everybody just kept their opinions to themselves regarding what they think went on and let the police get on with it, how would the world be a worse place exactly?
Well if you don't understand that, there is no help for you.No, I'm sorry - I don't understand why I should be discussing this case with Colin Stagg, why won't you help me?
I don't have the slightest problem with people's beliefs. What I find incomprehensible and beneath contempt is the base manner in which some choose to express them.
Ms Hopkins is merely a reflection of a phenomenon which illustrates the misuse of the www which has the propensity to achieve so much good but some parts of which have been taken over by really vile elements.
I live in the real world among real people ... quite often I have some doubts about others but am far too polite to express them. I was taught manners.
No, I'm sorry - I don't understand why I should be discussing this case with Colin Stagg, why won't you help me?
Now, if everybody just kept their opinions to themselves regarding what they think went on and let the police get on with it, how would the world be a worse place exactly?
Well if you don't understand that, there is no help for you.
Lord Justice Ognall made plain the innocence of Colin Stagg, just as the Portuguese prosecutors made plain the innocence of the McCanns.
Oh by the way brietta are you referring to the 'innocent couple' who needlessly and selfishly risked their children's safety, merely to socialise with their associates ?
He isn't the police.
I am referring to the innocent couple who are the victims of a heinous crime who have had every possible obstruction thrown into their path to obstruct every strategy they were forced to use to get officialdom to do what should have been done in the first instance ... and that was to continue the search for their missing daughter.
Who benefits from that attitude ... apart from carpet baggers like Ms Hopkins?
Talk about obtuse.OK, you want me to tell Colin Stagg that we should just keep our opinions to ourselves about the case and let the police get on with it and he will say: "no, keep on expressing your opinions about it and pretending you know more than the police because that will prevent people like me being falsely accused by them" - is that what you're saying? I'm sorry but I don't see the connection between members of the general public pretending they know stuff the police do and chatting about it online and the police falsely accusing innocent people of crimes they didn't commit (you could in fact have used the McCanns for this example too btw... 8(0(* )
When were they abducted?
I am referring to the innocent couple who are the victims of a heinous crime who have had every possible obstruction thrown into their path to obstruct every strategy they were forced to use to get officialdom to do what should have been done in the first instance ... and that was to continue the search for their missing daughter.
Who benefits from that attitude ... apart from carpet baggers like Ms Hopkins?
Neither are the Portuguese prosecutors.
I see 87% blame the mccanns in the avenging Standard poll now for the disappearance of Madeleine.
When were they abducted?
(Madeleine) May 3rd 2007.
It takes a modicum of intelligence to understand why that event would have been traumatic for Madeleine's parents, a trauma magnified by being falsely accused, of responsibility for her disappearance, for a 'cover-up', and of launching a fraudulent 'fund' in their (asserted as 'fact') 'dead' daughter's name ...
what they have gone through is nothing.....compared to what maddie did.
they deserve all they get......maddie doesn't
the mccs had a choice.....maddie didn't.........at three year old ...maddie paid the price of what they did
the mccs are not a innocent couple.they caused it....maddie was a innocent child
(Madeleine) May 3rd 2007.
It takes a modicum of intelligence to understand why that event would have been traumatic for Madeleine's parents, a trauma magnified by being falsely accused, of responsibility for her disappearance, for a 'cover-up', and of launching a fraudulent 'fund' in their (asserted as 'fact') 'dead' daughter's name ...
Madeleine was the primary victim. If it had been a possession that was stolen then they would have been the victims.
When were they abducted?
Madeleine is entitled to the right to be looked for without let or hindrance as long as there are active lines of inquiry to be followed.
The opprobrium directed at her parents helps Madeleine exactly how??
Little people with small minds with access to a column in a tabloid excoriating her parents helps Madeleine in what way?
Unfortunately there have always been those who enjoy a good witch hunt ... but the stamina and the mindset to keep it up for almost nine years must take some beating.
This may be fun and games to some ... but another anniversary ... and another birthday without their eldest child is fast approaching for the McCann family. Most normal people can have a little bit of understanding of how that must be for them ... the others are just a lost cause and not really worth bothering about.
I think you will find those people believe by leaving Maddie they exposed her to abduction
Is the light (slowly) dawning that Madeleine was abducted?
Progress of sorts, if so.
It maybe takes a while longer to develop the quality of compassion for the trauma experienced by the parents (and extended family) of an abducted child ....
Please give examples of people "spewing bile against Madeleine".
that really is rubbish ...maddie's family are the victims of a crime
NO!!! If you are really that interested ... google it yourself.
You implied it was in the Mail's comment section on the current article.
Madeleine is entitled to the right to be looked for without let or hindrance as long as there are active lines of inquiry to be followed.
The opprobrium directed at her parents helps Madeleine exactly how??
Little people with small minds with access to a column in a tabloid excoriating her parents helps Madeleine in what way?
Unfortunately there have always been those who enjoy a good witch hunt ... but the stamina and the mindset to keep it up for almost nine years must take some beating.
This may be fun and games to some ... but another anniversary ... and another birthday without their eldest child is fast approaching for the McCann family. Most normal people can have a little bit of understanding of how that must be for them ... the others are just a lost cause and not really worth bothering about.
I haven't bothered to read the current section in the Mail ... I have read it all before.
Where do you see any such implication in my post which said ...
"She 'rattles my cage' not one bit ... I haven't been taken in by her. Can you give just one instance when Ms Hopkins has shown any self restraint in 'speaking out' about anyone or anything she thinks may add to her notoriety.
There is a market and an audience for those who wish to spew bile against Madeleine and the McCann family ... Ms Hopkins has merely tapped into it."
I think there may be something lacking in your English language comprehension skills if you read any 'implication' there.
After 3 months of clutching it in hot and sweaty hands, even sun cream is unlikely to have been the dominant smell.
I do recall a discussion about Madeleine on one of the "sceptic" sites in which her looks were pulled apart, something to the effect of "it's probably just as well she's dead otherwise she'd have grown up to look just like her Dad, poor kid". I'm sure there's been other stuff too,I could recall all sorts of things. I was rather hoping the expert debaters could come up with a cite or two.
Strange how it wasn't alright to leave it to the PJ, it wasn't alright to leave Colin Stagg to the police, yet for some reason we shouldn't question SY, OG or the McCanns."We are not the police. We cannot pretend to know what really went on" - Katie Hopkins. Do you disagree with delightful Katie?
I could recall all sorts of things. I was rather hoping the expert debaters could come up with a cite or two.Oh I'm sure there's a screen shot of it somewhere, but I'm not the sort to collect them. Maybe someone else will help you out, as you seem very eager to read the bile against Madeleine.
Not "oh I read it somewhere I fink".
Oh I'm sure there's a screen shot of it somewhere, but I'm not the sort to collect them. Maybe someone else will help you out, as you seem very eager to read the bile against Madeleine.
Oh I'm sure there's a screen shot of it somewhere, but I'm not the sort to collect them. Maybe someone else will help you out, as you seem very eager to read the bile against Madeleine.
Why won't you criticize the mccanns for what they failed to do.
How about her calling a police officer merely doing his job a 'f#####g t####r' or the mccanns calling other officers 'tweedledum and tweedledee' ?
Very impressive dossier there.(http://alexsfunplace.com/ADF/coloringbook/images/AliceTweedledumTweedledee.gif)
After nine years you have managed to come up with 'tweedledum and tweedledee' and an expression which in retrospect was not only appropriate when used but proved to be remarkably prescient in the light of subsequent events.
Ms Hopkins was certainly a bit more inventive than that.
Actually the two descriptions given by either one or both of the mccanns could easily be turned inwards.
I note you are unable to criticise either of the pair whose less than masterful skills initiated events that led to the disappearance of their daughter.
Could you explain why you never put the blame where it lies ?
Or are you too 1-dimensional to accept the mccanns are responsible for their actions ?
I always put the blame for Madeleine's disappearance exactly where it lies ... and that is entirely the responsibility of the criminal who abducted her.
Neither you or Ms Hopkins seem too concerned about that ... although she at least recognises that there was a kidnapping and therefore an abductor.
Are all criminals blameless in your eyes ... or only the one in particular who must have caused unimaginable pain to the McCann family and the child s/he stole from all that she knew and loved?
Your reply was expected.
The crime is unknown, if any occurred.
Abduction is one scenario and without one critical factor, EVIDENCE.
You as I predicted are incapable of accepting the mccanns part in what led to their disappearance of their daughter.
Your responses merely reinforce the commonly held perception, that you only care for the mccanns.
As for the real tweedledum and tweedledee in this case, one only has to go back to one night in May.
IMHO naturally.
The case isn't about me. It isn't about Ms Hopkins who has alighted on an easy earner for herself. It isn't even about you.
It is all about a little girl who was stolen from her family.
I for one see nothing wrong in hoping for the best for her ... if that fails to meet with your approval, I am quite unconcerned.
The case isn't about me. It isn't about Ms Hopkins who has alighted on an easy earner for herself.
What's she earning then? Does she get commission for every person who reads her article? And why wait nine years to do so if that is her motive?
She didn't wait for nine years.
Very impressive dossier there.(http://alexsfunplace.com/ADF/coloringbook/images/AliceTweedledumTweedledee.gif)
After nine years you have managed to come up with 'tweedledum and tweedledee' and an expression which in retrospect was not only appropriate when used but proved to be remarkably prescient in the light of subsequent events.
Ms Hopkins was certainly a bit more inventive than that.
I know she has made the odd twitter post now and then , I was asking about her "earning"...the impression you gave was that she was making money out of her comments! As far as I can see she has read the papers for years and years, made the odd comment and for SOME reason has been a lot more expressive right now, money doesn't come into it
End of the day she's made her opinion known, she's had massive support on the issue, she could have been anyone, not many people like her and her antics me included, but she's said nothing that will land her in court like some rabids think, yawn
So you seem to think she is writing for the Mail etc pro bono ... 8)--)) how terribly public spirited of her.
So you seem to think she is writing for the Mail etc pro bono ... 8)--)) how terribly public spirited of her.
You may feel as public spirited as CR working pro bono for the McCanns.
@)(++(*
it hasent been a good day for gerry and kate or supporters has it not that they would admit it ?{)(**
I know she has made the odd twitter post now and then , I was asking about her "earning"...the impression you gave was that she was making money out of her comments! As far as I can see she has read the papers for years and years, made the odd comment and for SOME reason has been a lot more expressive right now, money doesn't come into it
End of the day she's made her opinion known, she's had massive support on the issue, she could have been anyone, not many people like her and her antics me included, but she's said nothing that will land her in court like some rabids think, yawn
You think Katie Hopkins doesn't get paid for her Column and Opinions?
How gullible can some people be, really?! Katie Hopkins writes articles for the Mail for purely altruistic reasons, yeh right and she spends her evenings helping out at a centre for Syrian refugees too I bet... @)(++(*
Katie Hopkins who said she had no feelings for the dead child washed up on a beach, who said to burn their boats the same time as many lost their lives.
Who told a woman she should have aborted her disabled child, and called another disabled child a t..t.
Nope sorry really can't listen to a woman like that.
Katie Hopkins who said she had no feelings for the dead child washed up on a beach, who said to burn their boats the same time as many lost their lives.
Who told a woman she should have aborted her disabled child, and called another disabled child a t..t.
Nope sorry really can't listen to a woman like that.
She has made some dreadful comments which now seem to be excused because of her "guts" in speaking out against the parents of a missing little girl.
I hope she recovers well from her operation and perhaps learns to be a little less outspoken and cruel.
She has labelled Junior Doctors as "greedy"................perhaps after being in hospital she may change her mind.
She has made some dreadful comments which now seem to be excused because of her "guts" in speaking out against the parents of a missing little girl.
I hope she recovers well from her operation and perhaps learns to be a little less outspoken and cruel.
She has labelled Junior Doctors as "greedy"................perhaps after being in hospital she may change her mind.
IMO she's just a media wannabee who has realised that 'being cruel' puts her in the spotlight.
Nothing to be proud of in that IMO - as being verbally cruel to people requires no talent whatsoever.
IMO she's just a media wannabee who has realised that 'being cruel' puts her in the spotlight.
Nothing to be proud of in that IMO - as being verbally cruel to people requires no talent whatsoever.
Can a Mod kindly explain to me why I am not allowed to say that KAtie Hopkins clearly enjoys being cruel to innocent people? It is utterly absurd that I am being censored in this way especially with no explanation.
so Katie Price can say what she likes but you cannot...censorship....It is absolutely true rhat she picks on people and group to be cruel to to further her career...an odious person
She has made some dreadful comments which now seem to be excused because of her "guts" in speaking out against the parents of a missing little girl.
I hope she recovers well from her operation and perhaps learns to be a little less outspoken and cruel.
She has labelled Junior Doctors as "greedy"................perhaps after being in hospital she may change her mind.
so Katie Price can say what she likes but you cannot...censorship....It is absolutely true rhat she picks on people and group to be cruel to to further her career...an odious personand Katie Hopkins too... 8(0(*
I too hope she makes a full and speedy recovery, Erngath, and has as good a time of it in hospital as she can under the circumstances.
I don't think however it will make her change her mind about anything; as I really cannot believe that she truly subscribes to the nastiness she puts into print.
It is a means to an end.
Being obnoxious seems to sell newspapers and pay the mortgage without much effort having to be expended in the process.
Such notoriety is possibly a reflection of the times and the lack of moral fibre in today's British society; the blame lies as much with that audience than with those who have seen a lucrative market and taken advantage of it.
and Katie Hopkins too... 8(0(*
I too hope she makes a full and speedy recovery, Erngath, and has as good a time of it in hospital as she can under the circumstances.
I don't think however it will make her change her mind about anything; as I really cannot believe that she truly subscribes to the nastiness she puts into print.
It is a means to an end.
Being obnoxious seems to sell newspapers and pay the mortgage without much effort having to be expended in the process.
Such notoriety is possibly a reflection of the times and the lack of moral fibre in today's British society; the blame lies as much with that audience than with those who have seen a lucrative market and taken advantage of it.
I don't know whether you are thick skinned as regarding people who don't believe the mccanns, or whether you are just in denial.
As for nastiness, here's some from last year...
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sl7pm3
Lack of moral fibre? As compared to what? Previous generations who were too scared by the churches and those who had control to express their real thoughts and feelings? What was moral about beating children in schools? What was moral about putting people in prison because their sexual drives were different? What was moral about forcing young women who made mistakes to forfeit the resulting babies? What was moral about wife-beating husbands who were seen as having the right to commit violence on their families? What was moral about sexism, racism and homophobia? Really!! At least modern society recognises freedom of choice, lifestyle and expression and tries to ensure equal opportunities and equal treatment for all.
Kindly take a look at my post regarding Ms Hopkins and her media career. If you happen to come across the word McCann or any reference to Madeleine or her family there, please feel free to point it out.
Ms Hopkins writes nasty pieces on a variety of subjects for a nasty target audience which seems to be appreciative of her ramblings. If she had no audience and stirred no controversy ... she would be out of a job.
What is moral about accusing people of crimes without proof under the guise of "freedom of expression"?
I am well aware of Ms. Hopkins career.
However, your continued refusal to answer certain questions or accept there are systematic abusers from among the mccann supporters remains your Achilles Heel.
aren't they the same person
One is a trifle more articulate, and the other one is a trifle better looking. But in the dark and the absence of speech, one might have a problem. Their views are pretty similar. It's all about Me.Am I allowed to say that one has a pair of big tits, the other IS a big tit, or is that a bit norty of me?
I don't know whether you are thick skinned as regarding people who don't believe the mccanns, or whether you are just in denial.
As for nastiness, here's some from last year...
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sl7pm3
I think I'm going to add you to my list of 'not worth bothering about' for a time ... you no longer amuse me.
I was always taught that with freedom comes responsibility.
I was always taught that with freedom comes responsibility.
What is staggering to me is the arrogance of those who were so dedicated to supporting and defending the McCanns. Nothing was off limits in their pursuit of those who disagreed with them, it seems. What kind of person dedicates hours of their time to ferreting out the personal details of others on the internet? Self appointed guardians of what can and cannot be said. Smug mutual congratulations when they are successful. Did they see themselves as guardians of morality on Twitter? Disgraceful behaviour.I hope you're not going to pretend that this sort of behaviour is limited to McCann supporters!
Katie Hopkins said what she had to say under her own name and is no doubt prepared to take any consequences arising. The nastier supporters don't need to ferret around, she's right there in their faces. Fair play to her.
Ms Hopkins has taken responsibility for her article; her name is there for all to see.
Am I allowed to say that one has a pair of big tits, the other IS a big tit, or is that a bit norty of me?
One is a trifle more articulate, and the other one is a trifle better looking. But in the dark and the absence of speech, one might have a problem. Their views are pretty similar. It's all about Me.
I see 87% blame the mccanns in the avenging Standard poll now for the disappearance of Madeleine.
I gather Katie Hopkins has serious personal health issues around epilepsy.
Whatever our thoughts about her thoughts (on the McCanns or any other issue) I'm sure we would all join in wishing her full and complete recovery from these health concerns.
However, that doesn't include the compilers of the dossier.anonymous cowards.....those who accuse and abuse the mccanns anonymously online...including you
Anonymous cowards, IMO of course.
Quite clever, I thought.
We can agree on that.
I wonder if any will have read her comments?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-brands-junior-doctors-7343345
Ice cold enema, perhaps?
8)--))
I didn't think Alfred was into tits.
P.S. Alfred was the one who mentioned tits in the first place.
It was only a play on words, Stephen. Just a brief bit of fun.
Are you speaking from personal experience jp ?
So was mine. 8(0(*
I know. Amusing sometimes, isn't it.
However, Back On Topic or I will be in trouble. And you wouldn't want that, would you.
Happily not. But then I don't take to twitter making controversial comments about junior doctors 12 days before having a major operation......
I really cannot think of anything more stupid.
Happily not. But then I don't take to twitter making controversial comments about junior doctors 12 days before having a major operation......
I really cannot think of anything more stupid.
It's ok, it won't be done by a junior doctor, they hardly do any operations these days. (Straight from a FRCS)
Imagine the harm Katie Hopkins has done to her own kids by her insistence on being Britain's Queen of the Trolls. How they must suffer in the playground as a result of their own mother's attention-seeking antics.
How do you explain alfred, that many people clearly agreed with her comments, as we can see in the Mail comments section on the story ?Of course thousands of people agreed with her, as they do on many of the vile things she writes. All it means is that there's lots of hateful people in the world, which we already knew. I pity her poor kids, imagine having a mother like that intent on stirring up hatred at every available opportunity. They must get ribbed about it mercilessly, unless she has chosen to home school them??
Of course thousands of people agreed with her, as they do on many of the vile things she writes. All it means is that there's lots of hateful people in the world, which we already knew. I pity her poor kids, imagine having a mother like that intent on stirring up hatred at every available opportunity. They must get ribbed about it mercilessly, unless she has chosen to home school them??
Oh for goodness sake, haven't you got it yet , simply a lot of people don't believe the mccanns and whilst they have every sympathy for Madeleine are sicked and tired of those two parents who clearly neglected their children being made icons in the press.I get it - no need to lose your rag.
I get it - no need to lose your rag.
Oh for goodness sake, haven't you got it yet , simply a lot of people don't believe the mccanns and whilst they have every sympathy for Madeleine are sicked and tired of those two parents who clearly neglected their children being made icons in the press.
...and the article has not been removed, and no sign of accusations of libel either from the mccanns.It can take months to mount a libel action, just sayin' like. That said, I doubt the McCanns will give Hopkins the satisfaction of being sued, she clearly enjoys the notoriety of it. The very worst thing you can do to the ASW is ignore her IMO.
It can take months to mount a libel action, just sayin' like. That said, I doubt the McCanns will give Hopkins the satisfaction of being sued, she clearly enjoys the notoriety of it. The very worst thing you can do to the ASW is ignore her IMO.
Of course thousands of people agreed with her, as they do on many of the vile things she writes. All it means is that there's lots of hateful people in the world, which we already knew. I pity her poor kids, imagine having a mother like that intent on stirring up hatred at every available opportunity. They must get ribbed about it mercilessly, unless she has chosen to home school them??
Ms Hopkins slammed the Junior Doctors as being greedy for wanting a little more cash & a little less stress for helping to save lives & caring for people. She deplored their unionised labour.
Meanwhile, she continues to make her contribution to society by verbally abusing those less fortunate than herself whilst raking in the cash by doing so. How low does that make the people who praise her?
Also the Mail obviously felt happy running the story.Sells papers, attracts website traffic, why do you think? That is why "journalists" like Katie Hopkins exist.
I wonder why.
Ms Hopkins slammed the Junior Doctors as being greedy for wanting a little more cash & a little less stress for helping to save lives & caring for people. She deplored their unionised labour.
Meanwhile, she continues to make her contribution to society by verbally abusing those less fortunate than herself whilst raking in the cash by doing so. How low does that make the people who praise her?
Ms Hopkins is an obnoxious offensive right wing etc etc etc
You are making two mistakes here
A) assuming her article is x y z and lumping it in with all her "usual antics"
B) assuming people praise her in totality (if at all praising her apart from speaking her mind) past and present and attempting to denigrate people who don't believe or have doubts about the "abduction" which is neither immoral or illegal
The only thing that is interesting is that the Mail have published this article
Sells papers, attracts website traffic, why do you think? That is why "journalists" like Katie Hopkins exist.
And that The Standard repeated it.
Ms Hopkins slammed the Junior Doctors as being greedy for wanting a little more cash & a little less stress for helping to save lives & caring for people. She deplored their unionised labour.
Meanwhile, she continues to make her contribution to society by verbally abusing those less fortunate than herself whilst raking in the cash by doing so. How low does that make the people who praise her?
And did a poll to boot
I think DM owns part of the Standard....so probably has some clout
DM, the essential WUM newspaper, funny
How dare she express, for once, an opinion which lots of people agree with? Silence her immediately!
Indeed, the irony, especially as it has towed the mccann line, but to give it credit, it has also allowed comments sections on the case for some time, something which the other papers dare not do.
Sadly she will have lots of support for her other opinions.
Refugees, disabled babies, Ebola being an effective way to control world population, being obnoxious to over weight people, being obnoxious to "ginger" haired folk and her remarks about suicidal people in prison are sure to have some support.
No sorry , she is as she is described, "gobby" and "rent a mouth".
Yes, they do say they are moderated though, but seems half the time the mods are "sleeping"There were a couple of inaccuracies, but anyone demanding a correction over when they washed a toy cat would look just slightly silly imo.
Anyway, KH has written a "piece" Mail has published it, Mail knows the exact line it can't cross and always stays just 2cm from it ergo getting away with murder a lot of the time, no libel committed, probably has got a lot of people thinking, Mccanns would be stupid to sue though
Yes, they do say they are moderated though, but seems half the time the mods are "sleeping"
Anyway, KH has written a "piece" Mail has published it, Mail knows the exact line it can't cross and always stays just 2cm from it ergo getting away with murder a lot of the time, no libel committed, probably has got a lot of people thinking, Mccanns would be stupid to sue though
Best ignored, then.
Her opinion will not have "thinking" people thinking. Who on God's earth would take any notice of her opinion.
Considering her track record of always making cruel and offensive comments about so many topics, I doubt her ill considered comments will hold much sway with any "thinking" folk.
I think she is a social commentator rather than a journalist? The important thing here is she broke the taboo about Mr AND Mrs perfect parents fronting a missing children charity, and the IRONY of that.Not once have hey said please do not leave your children alone and go out for a meal or drink i.e don't do what we did. The reason for this is they have forgiven themselves of a littel sin whilst lumping the blame at everyone else. Even to the point of pushing the 'we are the real victims here- feel sorry for us', all the while showing a nasty arrogant side towards those who tried to help them find their daughter.
Not everyone agrees with everything Katie says, but I for one agree she should have a platform to say it. I think the playing field is now being levelled, MSM is now realising it is in competition with educated researchers and lone independent journalists on the web. Readers are MSN savvy now, some just buy rags for competitions and money off coupons. The fall and fall of MSN is happening here and now.
I would see it more as doing what they are paid to do.
"It is wrong we should have to work such long hours and be subjected to so much stress but give us more dosh and it will be perfectly acceptable".
Not that what I have just posted nor what Ms Hopkins thinks on a variety of topics is relevant to this thread.
She made a few valid points in a typical rant in The Mail.
We now have few pages here describing what a baggage she is......yeah real intelligent stuff.
Grab a line.
There were a couple of inaccuracies, but anyone demanding a correction over when they washed a toy cat would look just slightly silly imo.
I fear you have been misinformed Alice. The dispute is that the new contract will result in the junior doctors working more unsocial hours for 20% less pay. But please don't let the facts stand in the way of a good prejudice.
Her opinion will not have "thinking" people thinking. Who on God's earth would take any notice of her opinion.
Considering her track record of always making cruel and offensive comments about so many topics, I doubt her ill considered comments will hold much sway with any "thinking" folk.
I fear you have been misinformed Alice. The dispute is that the new contract will result in the junior doctors working more unsocial hours for 20% less pay. But please don't let the facts stand in the way of a good prejudice.
And did a poll to boot
I think DM owns part of the Standard....so probably has some clout
DM, the essential WUM newspaper, funny
OFF TOPIC
Is that right? Point me in the right direction because I have never been able to get to the root.
Do you have a copy of the new contract they would have, the associated pay rates and when premium rates kick in ?
Why should they be exempt from the sort of things that have been happening in the private sector for 20 years or so?
I am prejudiced against anything that smacks of a Spanish Practice.
I fear you have been misinformed Alice. The dispute is that the new contract will result in the junior doctors working more unsocial hours for 20% less pay. But please don't let the facts stand in the way of a good prejudice.
Does it?
The Indie has just gone under in paper format (with presumably lay-offs). AFAIK, Lebedev is the owner of both the Indie and the ES. No idea about partial ownership.
PS: Whatever happened to the last female loud mouth, Samantha Brick, I wonder?
NHS is a 24/7 service. wow who'd a thunk it- doctors wanting 9-5. The high quality EXPENSIVE training they receive 'in house' requires they work unsociable hours.( this is due to the fact that people take ill any time of the day-inconsiderate bast...ds). 8)><(
As trainees, they sacrifice like other trainees in industry, to gain the experience to move up the ladder and the pickings are rich! Some consultants get well in excess of 100k with private work and NHS. Crying in the money pond... make it over flow.
back on topic..
"Her opinion will not have "thinking" people thinking. Who on God's earth would take any notice of her opinion."
Well stating the obvious- everyone here discussing it has an opinion of her opinion- including you!
...by stating you know who the 'thinking' people are and what they are thinking is funny. 8**8:/:
By premium rates I suppose you mean overtime... I believe it is 10 pm...up until 10 normal rates apply....i remember my son working a 12 hour hospital shift and then being asked...and having to agree ...to work the next 12 hours because the next doctor had phoned in sick
at work and on call is not the same as working constant 12 hours without a break as is the impression given. I was on call a lot of hours but actual input during the night was not frantic. I got to nap.
at work and on call is not the same as working constant 12 hours without a break as is the impression given. I was on call a lot of hours but actual input during the night was not frantic. I got to nap.
Sort of but lets not get hung up on whether there is a premium rate for working extended hours.
By premium rates I suppose you mean overtime... I believe it is 10 pm...up until 10 normal rates apply....i remember my son working a 12 hour hospital shift and then being asked...and having to agree ...to work the next 12 hours because the next doctor had phoned in sick
Sort of but lets not get hung up on whether there is a premium rate for working extended hours.we agree on something...but it it his registration that is on the line if he makes a mistake..he has had an offer on his house and will soon be relocating to australia..if I was younger I would join him
If your son had to work 24 hrs in one hit with minimal to no rests that shows an element of irresponsibility on the part of his employer.
we agree on something...but it it his registration that is on the line if he makes a mistake..he has had an offer on his house and will soon be relocating to australia..if I was younger I would join him
That's a lovely idea....you can catch up for coffee with Carly then whilst looking at killer snakes and wishing you weren't so horrible lol
Kylies in tasmania....my daughter lived in Australia ...now shes in Bournemouth uk ... I did visit her and got to see The Magic flute at Sydney opera house...that was special
how lovely for you...does anyone care?
I care...and that's all that matters
I care...and that's all that matters
One of my bucket list of things to do was to see an opera at the Verona Coliseum.
It was magical but sore on the backside as we were in the cheaper seats.
Quite but this is not "davels forum" or one where Nyone cares about your personal life, in fact it's quite mind numbing to keep reading you crowing about it
stick to what you are good at ie putting other people down in order to attempt to bolster yourself and your so called arguments
Quite but this is not "davels forum" or one where Nyone cares about your personal life, in fact it's quite mind numbing to keep reading you crowing about itYou have spent all evening putting Davel down and he has not respnded to your bait, you must be disappointed.
stick to what you are good at ie putting other people down in order to attempt to bolster yourself and your so called arguments
it doesn't matter...you did it... I stayed in Darling Harbour......What a wonderful city... If I was a junior doctor I would go...and many are
Don't you think it improves the harmony of the forum if there is a little personal exchange of experiences ?it does but davel is the antipathy of creating harmony, obviously you are new on here, night night, and Ernie just came off top of my head, don't know you from sky,sleep well
You called me Ernie earlier?? That was a name used by some to address me on the old sky forum.
It's a sad time for the NHS. Off now.Goodnight.
good to see the Mail premoting the abduction again
Every cloud. And this is a good one. Katie Hopkins believes that Madeleine was Abducted.
Every cloud. And this is a good one. Katie Hopkins believes that Madeleine was Abducted.
For someone who plies her trade as a wordsmith, she isn't even a very good journalist ...
That first morning in hospital you understand the enormity of your new responsibility to keep another little part of you alive. You have accepted The Fear. (birth of a child)
Enormity?
Something unspeakably evil?
and all those comments agreeing with her
There were a couple of inaccuracies, but anyone demanding a correction over when they washed a toy cat would look just slightly silly imo.
What are you on about ?
I know. So pleased to see this.
Perhaps you should read the comments again.
How many believe in abduction.
Have alterations been made to the article ? &%+((£
Why would I want to do that. They agree with her.
Read the article.
Enormity = vastness of size or extent
Surely you are not cherry picking definitions.
@ benice
By the time CC was washed weeks later - it no longer resembled the cuddly toy Kate was used to seeing her daughter with. It was really grubby and smelled of suntan lotion. Washing it restored it to how it looked when Madeleine played with it.
KH's comments re CC were because she'd got her facts wrong - and her cruel condemnation of Kate emanated from that IMO. To publically slur someone's character based on a lie is libellous IMO. And if it isn't it should be.
are you for real...........got really grubby ...smelled ...how the hell did it get in that state then
i think you have missed the point ....the whole idea of having something that belonged to your child ...is they touched it....you don't wash that away
On the contrary IMO you clearly have missed the point which is that KH made a false allegation against Kate when she claimed she washed CC after only 5 days.
If you actually believe that in carrying CC around as a form of comfort for weeks on end - it would have remained in a pristine condition and not become grubby and smell of suntan lotion - then that's not my problem.
On the contrary IMO you clearly have missed the point which is that KH made a false allegation against Kate when she claimed she washed CC after only 5 days.
If you actually believe that in carrying CC around as a form of comfort for weeks on end - it would have remained in a pristine condition and not become grubby and smell of suntan lotion - then that's not my problem.
read your post again ...or look it up ...you are wrong ...it was washed before the dogs came 8**8:/:
Kate washed CC 5 days after Madeleines disappearance. Gerrys sister said it was cleaned again two months ago because it was filthy after being carried around.
A former Scotland Yard detective said. ‘It’s the last thing I’d expect a mother who is devastated at losing her child to do’.
Katie Hopkins was intent on displaying Kate's seeming coldness, washing Cuddlecat five days after Madeleine's disappearance is the proof she offers up for this. The fact that the toy was eventually washed around 60 days after Madeleine's disappearance, and after having been kept in close proximity to Kate for all that time, is relevant to the argument as it shows that Kate was NOT cold and indifferent but quite the opposite. The toy was her closest link to Madeleine but there had to come a time when she would need to relinquish it, albeit for a quick clean and brush up, unless people here think she should still be clutching it, unwashed and stinking, to her bosom even now?
We know the toy was never sent to the FSS.
Perhaps, if it had been, John Lowe would have detected the presence of dog's saliva, as well as suntan lotion?
i think what your problem is ....you do not understand ..sentimentality....after CC was washed it became just another toy
We know the toy was never sent to the FSS.
Perhaps, if it had been, John Lowe would have detected the presence of dog's saliva, as well as suntan lotion?
My favourite 'cuddlecat' moment was its little pink head popping up over Kate's bag as she went to her arguido interview. Now tell me it wasn't placed there for maximum effect.
I still can't find any reference in the article heading up this thread to cuddle-cat.
Are we talking about a different article?
oh pleeeeeeese....keep up
its disgusting it was washed ...im sure there are many out there who have things ....that mean every thing ...and if washed would mean nothing ..
All Katie Hopkins did was repeat that the McCann's left their children alone and rubbed in the fact that loving parents wouldn't have done that, which is rubbish, the McCann's did leave the children and so did their friends, where as I wouldn't leave my children I wouldn't say that the McCann's are not loving caring parents, because it is obvious that they are, they made a very bad decision and it back fired on them. Kate screaming 'we've let her down Gerry' more than shows that Kate was distraught and regretted leaving them. The fact that Gerry said 'people will not be leaving their children alone because of us' says that they knew it was wrong and that others hopefully wouldn't do the same. He also said they would never leave their children alone again. How much more do people expect them to say?
Kate Hopkins brought the washing of Cuddle Cat that she says happened after only five days, which we know is a lie, only again to make out that these parents are not loving and caring because they washed Cuddle Cat, this is just to get the public on her side and I find that just quite sickening.
Then she went on to say the McCann's should stop looking for Madeleine that no amount of money will bring her back, or words similar. Well how the hell does she know that? and who gives up on their missing child? The McCann's were grateful that SY were opening up the investigation as there were certain leads that hadn't been investigated. SY is in the process of looking into these leads and so are the Portuguese police, so I think Katie Hopkins doesn't know whether they know where Madeleine is or if she is dead or alive and so her opinions mean nothing.
People such as Katie Hopkins make their money by being outrageous and out spoken, it is something she takes pride in, she doesn't care and she has said this how much she upsets anyone in doing so. I for one couldn't do what Katie Hopkins does because I have empathy with people and it would play on my conscious if I upset someone, but none of us are the same and if that is how she wants to make money then that is entirely up to her.
All Katie Hopkins did was repeat that the McCann's left their children alone and rubbed in the fact that loving parents wouldn't have done that, which is rubbish, the McCann's did leave the children and so did their friends, where as I wouldn't leave my children I wouldn't say that the McCann's are not loving caring parents, because it is obvious that they are, they made a very bad decision and it back fired on them. Kate screaming 'we've let her down Gerry' more than shows that Kate was distraught and regretted leaving them. The fact that Gerry said 'people will not be leaving their children alone because of us' says that they knew it was wrong and that others hopefully wouldn't do the same. He also said they would never leave their children alone again. How much more do people expect them to say?
Kate Hopkins brought the washing of Cuddle Cat that she says happened after only five days, which we know is a lie, only again to make out that these parents are not loving and caring because they washed Cuddle Cat, this is just to get the public on her side and I find that just quite sickening.
Then she went on to say the McCann's should stop looking for Madeleine that no amount of money will bring her back, or words similar. Well how the hell does she know that? and who gives up on their missing child? The McCann's were grateful that SY were opening up the investigation as there were certain leads that hadn't been investigated. SY is in the process of looking into these leads and so are the Portuguese police, so I think Katie Hopkins doesn't know whether they know where Madeleine is or if she is dead or alive and so her opinions mean nothing.
People such as Katie Hopkins make their money by being outrageous and out spoken, it is something she takes pride in, she doesn't care and she has said this how much she upsets anyone in doing so. I for one couldn't do what Katie Hopkins does because I have empathy with people and it would play on my conscious if I upset someone, but none of us are the same and if that is how she wants to make money then that is entirely up to her.
unwashed and stinkingby not being washed? What is your point? Are you criticising Kate for NOT washing it sooner?
like i said earlier ....how does a precious child's toy ....end up...in that state
My favourite 'cuddlecat' moment was its little pink head popping up over Kate's bag as she went to her arguido interview. Now tell me it wasn't placed there for maximum effect.Your cynicism knows no bounds does it? Repulsive.
Very well said Lace. Totally agree.
by not being washed? What is your point? Are you criticising Kate for NOT washing it sooner?
@ lace
they made a very bad decision and it back fired on them
so you think that makes it ok then....like someone thinks they are capable to drive after drinking and then kills someone ....
or would that be different ...because they are not the mccs
Why doesn't Katie Hopkins tell the parents of Claudia Lawrence that there's no point spending any more money on trying to find out what happened to her as she ain't coming back and it's time to move on? Hasn't the woman any concept of justice? That a serious crime has almost certainly been committed and that means that there is a potentially dangerous person out there that needs to be caught and brought to trial?
Quite frankly, anyone who had an ounce of common sense, would never have done what the mcccanns did.
Loving parents do not place their socializing above their children's safety.
No amount of attempted whitewashing will change that.
Of course I don't think it was ok, I have said I wouldn't have left my children alone. I am saying they made a bad decision as did their friends, they have lost Madeleine because of it and are suffering because of it, the guilt must eat them up every day. Katie Hopkins didn't remind them of what they did as they have the burden of what they did to carry around with them, all she did was wind people up to have a go at them again, which to me is sickening.
oh pleeeeeeese....keep up
its disgusting it was washed ...im sure there are many out there who have things ....that mean every thing ...and if washed would mean nothing ..
read your post again ...or look it up ...you are wrong ...it was washed before the dogs came 8**8:/:
Kate washed CC 5 days after Madeleines disappearance. Gerrys sister said it was cleaned again two months ago because it was filthy after being carried around.
A former Scotland Yard detective said. ‘It’s the last thing I’d expect a mother who is devastated at losing her child to do’.
NO.
What the comments section did was reveal that a lot of people are sick and tired of the mccanns bleating, as in the articles last week, trying to get sympathy for their repeated act of rank stupidity and carelessness.
Likewise, whilst some believed in abduction, clearly others didn't.
Also, again a recurrent theme, was what about other missing children, why this emphasis on just one child.
it proves it meant nothing to her ....they use everything for there own gain....look at maddie's sticker book ....ripped apart without a second thought
I don't think they were trying to get sympathy for what they did, I think they were just voicing that the twins wanted Madeleine back and so did they, there was nothing suggesting that they were saying what they had done was ok, where was that Stephen I missed it.
People have their own opinions as to what happened to Madeleine yes, but to keep on berating the McCann's for something they know they did wrong and can not put right is just nasty and cruel.
The other missing children? what other abducted children are you talking about Stephen, oh, you don't believe in the abduction story do you, well isn't it important then that SY find out what happened to Madeleine? there could be an abductor out there? Most of the missing children have either been abducted by a parent or have run away, I believe that all other children in the UK who have been abducted have either been found dead or have had their case investigated, if any new evidence is brought forward then that cold case is re opened. Would you please refer to a case that you think needs money spent on it?
You are talking with hindsight which they didn't have at the time. For all they knew Madeleine could be found at any second. Therefore the sticker book would have none of the sentimental value at that time which it might later have acquired.
So easy to be wise after the event.
You didn't answer my point.
Why is Madeleine special in mccann supporter eyes ?
Clearly the SY investigation is winding down, as to the Portuguese, nothing appears to be happening there either.
So you tell me Lace, without an abductor, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE MCCANNS ?
I have never understood the fuss made by some about Cuddle Cat being washed.
Your cynicism knows no bounds does it? Repulsive.
Of course I don't think it was ok, I have said I wouldn't have left my children alone. I am saying they made a bad decision as did their friends, they have lost Madeleine because of it and are suffering because of it, the guilt must eat them up every day. Katie Hopkins didn't remind them of what they did as they have the burden of what they did to carry around with them, all she did was wind people up to have a go at them again, which to me is sickening.
What are you talking about? Any child is special whether they belong to the McCann's or not, Madeleine disappeared in Portugal, the first investigation did not cover all the leads, SY found new leads, they are investigating.
Now answer my questions Stephen, where in the articles that were recently printed in the paper does Kate McCann ask for sympathy about leaving the children?
Also what missing child in the UK do you think is not getting the attention it deserves?
It's not my cynicism that's the problem, it's your gullibility. Are you truly asking us to believe that cuddlecat's head poking out of Kate's bag the way it was was simply fortuitous ?I hadn't even noticed it, nor given it one second's thought in the last 8 years. The fact that you fixate on these tiny details is really quite sad IMO.
How do you know that the McCann's didn't have something else of Madeleine's what about the outfit she wore in the last photo? Maybe that was under Kate's pillow, we don't know. Cuddle Cat had Eddie throwing it up in the air and playing with it, it was covered in sun screen and sand, so Kate washed it.
how do you know this ???????.......did you see it .....she washed it before the dogs ...fgs
did you ever see maddie with it.....noooo
all you know is what you were told ..it was maddie's favorite toy....like you believe everything you are told by the mccs ....
the mccs don't tell the truth ....the mccs ....they tell you what you are supposed to believe...there version
thankfully not every one is as gullible
As a parent, why would you wash away the last traces you had of your child?
Reporter Andrew Price..Telegraph Sept 8th 2007 wrote…Was I alone in wondering whether that was for comfort or because it was what the PR advisers suggested?
wrong ....it doesn't need K H ...to wind people up ...what the mccs did .,...they do that all by themselves....
i agree about the guilt though ....but your interpretation of the guilt [what they did] ....is different to mine ....
I have never understood the fuss made by some about Cuddle Cat being washed.
well it says a lot about you ....maybe the below will enlighten you ...but when that was wrote it had already been washedWhat date was it washed, and please provide the cite for this.
Published: 09 May 2007
Distraught mum Kate McCann presses little Madeleine's favourite toy to her lips as she prays for her daughter's safe returnThe 38-year-old has carried fluffy pink plaything "Cuddle Cat" everywhere for the past five days, pinning it to her handbag and taking it to church in Praia da Luz, the Algarve.
.
A source said: "It's her way of keeping something of Madeleine close to her. Any mother can imagine how important it has become."
It is grubby now, a little battered and undoubtedly tear-stained. But the pink soft toy that Kate McCann has hugged close to her over this interminable week, the only remaining physical link with her daughter, is becoming the focus for the thoughts, fears, prayers and dwindling hopes of all of us.
Madeleine McCann christened it the "Cuddle Cat", according to a relative. It is the toy she wanted when she was upset and frightened, when she felt in need of a cuddle. And it is all the more poignant because each of us will know a child who takes unfathomable comfort from something similar; the "huggy" blanket, however grimy, that a toddler refuses to be separated from at bedtime, or an ancient bear of indeterminate breed that comes into its own when tiredness swamps a four-year-old.
To learn that Maddy's precious toy was left behind in the bedroom of the McCann's holiday apartment from where she was abducted last Thursday is all the more heart-breaking.
Whatever fragments of comfort it gives her shattered mother to have something of her daughter's to clutch while she waits for news, she will be wishing fervently that Maddy was holding it instead. If ever this little girl needed her Cuddle Cat it is now.
how do you know this ???????.......did you see it .....she washed it before the dogs ...fgs
did you ever see maddie with it.....noooo
all you know is what you were told ..it was maddie's favorite toy....like you believe everything you are told by the mccs ....
the mccs don't tell the truth ....the mccs ....they tell you what you are supposed to believe...there version
thankfully not every one is as gullible
As a parent, why would you wash away the last traces you had of your child?
For got sakes, wash away the last traces of your child!!! they had umpteen things belonging to Madeleine, the same people who go on about the washing of Cuddle Cat are the same people who go on about the McCann's keeping Madeleine's room as a shrine to her. Why don't they just mind their own business about what the McCann's treasure of Madeleine's it's no one else's business. You remind of me of some who go on that the book Kate wrote wasn't about Madeleine, they expected the book to be all about Madeleine, why? The McCann's keep those memories for themselves.
Reporter Andrew Price..Telegraph Sept 8th 2007 wrote…Was I alone in wondering whether that was for comfort or because it was what the PR advisers suggested?
You are talking with hindsight which they didn't have at the time. For all they knew Madeleine could be found at any second. Therefore the sticker book would have none of the sentimental value at that time which it might later have acquired.
So easy to be wise after the event.
well why wasn't they out looking for her then if they thought maddie was out there .....why was a timeline more important any way...
well it says a lot about you ....maybe the below will enlighten you ...but when that was wrote it had already been washed
Published: 09 May 2007
Distraught mum Kate McCann presses little Madeleine's favourite toy to her lips as she prays for her daughter's safe returnThe 38-year-old has carried fluffy pink plaything "Cuddle Cat" everywhere for the past five days, pinning it to her handbag and taking it to church in Praia da Luz, the Algarve.
.
A source said: "It's her way of keeping something of Madeleine close to her. Any mother can imagine how important it has become."
It is grubby now, a little battered and undoubtedly tear-stained. But the pink soft toy that Kate McCann has hugged close to her over this interminable week, the only remaining physical link with her daughter, is becoming the focus for the thoughts, fears, prayers and dwindling hopes of all of us.
Madeleine McCann christened it the "Cuddle Cat", according to a relative. It is the toy she wanted when she was upset and frightened, when she felt in need of a cuddle. And it is all the more poignant because each of us will know a child who takes unfathomable comfort from something similar; the "huggy" blanket, however grimy, that a toddler refuses to be separated from at bedtime, or an ancient bear of indeterminate breed that comes into its own when tiredness swamps a four-year-old.
To learn that Maddy's precious toy was left behind in the bedroom of the McCann's holiday apartment from where she was abducted last Thursday is all the more heart-breaking.
Whatever fragments of comfort it gives her shattered mother to have something of her daughter's to clutch while she waits for news, she will be wishing fervently that Maddy was holding it instead. If ever this little girl needed her Cuddle Cat it is now.
What date was it washed, and please provide the cite for this.
well it says a lot about you ....maybe the below will enlighten you ...but when that was wrote it had already been washed
Published: 09 May 2007
Distraught mum Kate McCann presses little Madeleine's favourite toy to her lips as she prays for her daughter's safe returnThe 38-year-old has carried fluffy pink plaything "Cuddle Cat" everywhere for the past five days, pinning it to her handbag and taking it to church in Praia da Luz, the Algarve.
.
A source said: "It's her way of keeping something of Madeleine close to her. Any mother can imagine how important it has become."
It is grubby now, a little battered and undoubtedly tear-stained. But the pink soft toy that Kate McCann has hugged close to her over this interminable week, the only remaining physical link with her daughter, is becoming the focus for the thoughts, fears, prayers and dwindling hopes of all of us.
Madeleine McCann christened it the "Cuddle Cat", according to a relative. It is the toy she wanted when she was upset and frightened, when she felt in need of a cuddle. And it is all the more poignant because each of us will know a child who takes unfathomable comfort from something similar; the "huggy" blanket, however grimy, that a toddler refuses to be separated from at bedtime, or an ancient bear of indeterminate breed that comes into its own when tiredness swamps a four-year-old.
To learn that Maddy's precious toy was left behind in the bedroom of the McCann's holiday apartment from where she was abducted last Thursday is all the more heart-breaking.
Whatever fragments of comfort it gives her shattered mother to have something of her daughter's to clutch while she waits for news, she will be wishing fervently that Maddy was holding it instead. If ever this little girl needed her Cuddle Cat it is now.
If what you say is true then I will gladly retract my previous comments.
I'm not saying it's not true - but as this is the first time I've heard of this in 9 years - would you please provide a cite to authenticate it.
Sometime between the 4th and the 9th of May, according to Xtina. Although the article say nothing about that.Perhaps she would like to provide the source for this information, assuming it isn't Katie Hopkins...?
I'm still curious about how discussion morphed onto cuddle-cat.
Katie Hopkins doesn't mention the toy?
I'm still curious about how discussion morphed onto cuddle-cat.Did you not read the full bile-filled article Ferryman? This is what the nasty cow wrote:
Katie Hopkins doesn't mention the toy?
Did you not read the full bile-filled article Ferryman? This is what the nasty cow wrote:
Leaving your babies alone, too far away to see. Knowing your daughter is gone and still able to play tennis. Taking her little bed-time toy, Cuddle Cat, with the last smell of their daughter, and putting it in the wash just five days after she vanished into the night.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3457221/KATIE-HOPKINS-ll-never-know-really-happened-Maddy-parents-accept-share-blame-let-go.html#ixzz415gpy7e1
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Talking of bile filled views, try this.Twitter is for tw..s. I've seen plenty of bile on there, the vast majority of it from McCann "sceptics" who outnumber supporters on the #McCann tag by 10 to one.
I recommend you proceed with caution (and I am being serious).
Brietta , take note.
https://twitter.com/LoveRandomleigh
Twitter is for tw..s. I've seen plenty of bile on there, the vast majority of it from McCann "sceptics" who outnumber supporters on the #McCann tag by 10 to one.
I hadn't even noticed it, nor given it one second's thought in the last 8 years. The fact that you fixate on these tiny details is really quite sad IMO.
Simply commenting on something does not a fixation make Alfie.The fact that this tiny detail lodged in your mind 9 years ago and is still being trotted out by you all these years later would seem to say otherwise.
GONCALO AMARAL ON CUDDLE CATI take it we're not going to get a cite from you concerning the washing of Cuddlecat five days after MAdeleine went missing...?
From his book:
These first observations are not the only ones that lead us to consider a set-up. The way the bed sheets were arranged but also the child's soft toy equally raise doubts.
- Do you see how the sheets are lying? You'd think the child got out by herself....or that she didn't sleep there.
- Someone could have unintentionally touched the curtains while looking for the little girl inside the apartment.
- And the soft toy she slept with? That's not in a natural position either. How would she have found it, along the pillow like that?
- The mother says that the soft toy was beside the pillow when she noticed the disappearance, which, according to her, was its usual place.
- Which means that the little girl slept without holding it? Children normally clutch their security object to fall asleep. But if that's not the case, the way it's placed doesn't seem natural. She would inevitably have moved it turning over in her sleep.
C C was just another P R ploy.....it meant nothing to k mc ....it would have been kept private a personal thing ..for her and maddie ,...not flaunted about...to get filthy and stinking ....according to her ...it was the last thing maddie held ....
The fact that this tiny detail lodged in your mind 9 years ago and is still being trotted out by you all these years later would seem to say otherwise.
I think if you go right back to the beginning of this thread it is dear Katie Hopkins who brought up the subject of Cuddlecat. Then pages and pages on, you yourself made a claim that Kate washed Cuddlecat within 5 days of Madeleine's disappearance, a claim which you have failed to substantiate. Faithlilly has also chipped in with her "favourite Cuddlecat moment" - a glimpse of said toy 9 years ago she remembers fondly to this very day, and yet apparently it is me causes mirth and who can't be taken seriously. Well go figure, I suppose in the topsy turvy world of the "sceptic" that's only to be expected... *&*%£
@)(++(*....oh you are so funny alf ....who can take you seriously..
i think you might find if you go back ...it was benice who brought this up in the first place
lets face it ....you don't have to be fixated on anything ....to do with the mccs ...they have provided so much over the years ...
its the abduction ....it seems you are fixated on ....cant discuss that ...as there is no proof
so all that is left to you ...is to trash ....all that has nothing to do with it ....because it points to it never happening
I think if you go right back to the beginning of this thread it is dear Katie Hopkins who brought up the subject of Cuddlecat. Then pages and pages on, you yourself made a claim that Kate washed Cuddlecat within 5 days of Madeleine's disappearance, a claim which you have failed to substantiate. Faithlilly has also chipped in with her "favourite Cuddlecat moment" - a glimpse of said toy 9 years ago she remembers fondly to this very day, and yet apparently it is me causes mirth and who can't be taken seriously. Well go figure, I suppose in the topsy turvy world of the "sceptic" that's only to be expected... *&*%£
In response to what I underline, unless we are talking about a different article, it does not refer to cuddle-cat (I don't think).I'm talking about Katie Hopkins article, the one this thread is on about - what article are you talking about?
I've read it several times ....
I'm talking about Katie Hopkins article, the one this thread is on about - what article are you talking about?
I'm talking about Katie Hopkins article, the one this thread is on about - what article are you talking about?
well it says a lot about you ....maybe the below will enlighten you ...but when that was wrote it had already been washed
Published: 09 May 2007
Distraught mum Kate McCann presses little Madeleine's favourite toy to her lips as she prays for her daughter's safe returnThe 38-year-old has carried fluffy pink plaything "Cuddle Cat" everywhere for the past five days, pinning it to her handbag and taking it to church in Praia da Luz, the Algarve.
.
A source said: "It's her way of keeping something of Madeleine close to her. Any mother can imagine how important it has become."
[b]It is grubby now, a little battered and undoubtedly tear-stained. But the pink soft toy that Kate McCann has hugged close to her over this interminable week, the only remaining physical link with her daughter, is becoming the focus for the thoughts, fears, prayers and dwindling hopes of all of us.
Madeleine McCann christened it the "Cuddle Cat", according to a relative. It is the toy she wanted when she was upset and frightened, when she felt in need of a cuddle. And it is all the more poignant because each of us will know a child who takes unfathomable comfort from something similar; the "huggy" blanket, however grimy, that a toddler refuses to be separated from at bedtime, or an ancient bear of indeterminate breed that comes into its own when tiredness swamps a four-year-old.
To learn that Maddy's precious toy was left behind in the bedroom of the McCann's holiday apartment from where she was abducted last Thursday is all the more heart-breaking.
Whatever fragments of comfort it gives her shattered mother to have something of her daughter's to clutch while she waits for news, she will be wishing fervently that Maddy was holding it instead. If ever this little girl needed her Cuddle Cat it is now.[/b]
read your post again ...or look it up ...you are wrong ...it was washed before the dogs came 8**8:/:
Kate washed CC 5 days after Madeleines disappearance. Gerrys sister said it was cleaned again two months ago because it was filthy after being carried around.
A former Scotland Yard detective said. ‘It’s the last thing I’d expect a mother who is devastated at losing her child to do’.
Cuddle Cat was in the bed with Madeleine. Cuddle Cat was evidence. Cuddle Cat was not carefully bagged immediately as evidence and dispatched to the Portuguese lab for forensic examination.
It is recognised as one of the initial errors of the investigation spearheaded by Goncalo Amaral.
Perhaps Katie Hopkins should take a step back and wonder why Cuddle Cat should not have been taken to be tested and not why it should have been available to be washed.
In my experience children smell of their last bath and talc ... I have never noticed the 'smell of a child' on a clean soft toy ... has anyone?
How do you know cuddle cat was in bed with Madeleine, when the bed of course looks barely disturbed ?
Mrs McCann said so, so it must be true. 8(0(*
..and we are to believe everything she said or says. 8**8:/:
Absolutely. How could one doubt a grieving mother?
Cuddle Cat was in the bed with Madeleine. Cuddle Cat was evidence. Cuddle Cat was not carefully bagged immediately as evidence and dispatched to the Portuguese lab for forensic examination.
It is recognised as one of the initial errors of the investigation spearheaded by Goncalo Amaral.
Perhaps Katie Hopkins should take a step back and wonder why Cuddle Cat should not have been taken to be tested and not why it should have been available to be washed.
In my experience children smell of their last bath and talc ... I have never noticed the 'smell of a child' on a clean soft toy ... has anyone?
A sticker book requires no personal input from a child. Merely removing the stickers and placing them in the correct place. I cannot see that it would have any sentimental value, unlike little drawings done by a child. If I remember correctly Madeleine's little drawings were still displayed in the kitchen when the film was made showing Kate, Gerry and the twins quite some time after the abduction. Those are items which one would keep not some manufactured, shop bought sticker book.
Cuddle Cat was in the bed with Madeleine. Cuddle Cat was evidence. Cuddle Cat was not carefully bagged immediately as evidence and dispatched to the Portuguese lab for forensic examination.
It is recognised as one of the initial errors of the investigation spearheaded by Goncalo Amaral.
Perhaps Katie Hopkins should take a step back and wonder why Cuddle Cat should not have been taken to be tested and not why it should have been available to be washed.
In my experience children smell of their last bath and talc ... I have never noticed the 'smell of a child' on a clean soft toy ... has anyone?
What does DNA smell like?
Jon Corner, a godfather of one of the McCanns’ children, said: "The Cuddle Cat was reeking with Madeleine’s DNA. That easily explains why DNA has been found in the hire car and on clothing that Kate bought after Madeleine disappeared."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id60.html
Is there even any evidence that Madeleine had played with the sticker book? It has been my experience that when holidaying with young children quite often there has been a colouring/sticker book and pencils provided in a welcome pack.
She had busy, full days with plenty of activities, they read her bedtime stories and if memory serves me well the couch had been pushed against the wall because the children threw cards etc. behind it.
Why one would pick on something which occurred when the priority was a missing child and getting immediate memories down into some sort of order is beyond me.
Russell O'Brien wrote the timeline which appeared to meet with the approval of the attending officers who were not keen on issuing an alert. " ...and then turning round to me writing the timeline and saying 'That's what we want', fair enough." Russell's rogatory statement
It's the shrieks of horror that accompany the idea that the sticker book was used to write down the timeline which I find ridiculous. You are right there is no evidence that she had played with it. As I said there is nothing of a child's own creativity or personality in a completed or partially completed sticker book. Just another way to attack Madeleine's parents and pretty stupid it is.
Priorities, dear boy, priorities
What does DNA smell like?
Jon Corner, a godfather of one of the McCanns’ children, said: "The Cuddle Cat was reeking with Madeleine’s DNA. That easily explains why DNA has been found in the hire car and on clothing that Kate bought after Madeleine disappeared."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id60.html
He doubtless meant teeming. Or the report is a typo ....
So why instead of writing their timelines, why weren't they searching ?
He doubtless meant teeming. Or the report is a typo ....
Or the guys a bit dim......of course you never use the wrong word do you... *cough*
What was more important in your opinion ... bearing in mind they had all been searching ... the women comforting a distraught mother and guarding the remaining children ... continuing the search as one of the many other searchers, or writing down the facts which would immediately inform the investigating authorities?.
Rhetorical question, please don't trouble yourself to answer ...
(a) you have a small amount of repetitive quotes to meet your requirements ~
(b) I had forgotten I'm ignoring you for the time being.
What was more important in your opinion ... bearing in mind they had all been searching ... the women comforting a distraught mother and guarding the remaining children ... continuing the search as one of the many other searchers, or writing down the facts which would immediately inform the investigating authorities?
Rhetorical question, please don't trouble yourself to answer ...
(a) you have a small amount of repetitive quotes to meet your requirements ~
(b) I had forgotten I'm ignoring you for the time being.
For those who are worried about Ms Hopkins mistakes, which 'proper journalists don't make;
Cuddle Cat placed out of reach, 12 August 2007
Maddy was alive when taken Sunday Mirror
By Lori Campbell in Praia da Luz
Published: 12/08/2007
Missing Madeleine McCann's favourite pink Cuddle Cat toy was taken from her arms as she slept and placed beyond her reach by her kidnapper. That is why police are certain Madeleine was snatched while she was asleep - and was NOT killed or injured in the holiday apartment.....There is also further "concrete evidence" that Madeleine was still ALIVE when she left the holiday apartment. Her kidnapper had a window of just five minutes to strike - from when dad Gerry last checked on the children until family friend Jane Tanner saw a man carrying away a child she is sure was Madeleine wrapped in a blanket.....Police have specific evidence from the apartment that she was still alive.......Madeleine was kidnapped as the toy she had fallen asleep with was left on a ledge placed too high for a child to reach...............There was a window of less than five minutes for a kidnapper to pounce - not enough time to kill her and clean up...........Police do not believe blood found in the apartment was Madeleine's as it was not consistent with signs of a struggle......The patio doors were unlocked but the intruder used the window to escape with Madeleine as the shutters were forced up........Our police source said: "When Kate tucked Madeleine up in bed earlier in the evening, she had toy tightly in her arms as she did every night. So Kate was terrified when she spotted it had been left in a place too high for her to reach. Kate also noticed the window was wide opened and the shutters jammed up. It was because of these things that she had no doubt Madeleine had been kidnapped and she ran out to scream for help."
Guarding the remaining children.[/b]
Kate McCann left the remaining children to tell the others Madeleine was missing.
Your responses lack logic and reasoned argument.
As if the phantom child stealer would strike again.
Shades of horses and stable doors springs to mind.
Cuddle Cat was in the bed with Madeleine. Cuddle Cat was evidence. Cuddle Cat was not carefully bagged immediately as evidence and dispatched to the Portuguese lab for forensic examination.
It is recognised as one of the initial errors of the investigation spearheaded by Goncalo Amaral.
Perhaps Katie Hopkins should take a step back and wonder why Cuddle Cat should not have been taken to be tested and not why it should have been available to be washed.
In my experience children smell of their last bath and talc ... I have never noticed the 'smell of a child' on a clean soft toy ... has anyone?
Eddie barked at it because cadaver hands fetched it and put it on the bed. I want to see all those photos of Madeleine with her precious cat.
Why didn't Eddie bark while he was playing with the toy?
Eddie barked at it because cadaver hands fetched it and put it on the bed. I want to see all those photos of Madeleine with her precious cat.what a creepy couple of sentences. Do get a grip.
From a source who knows MG.
I asked Martin why Eddie did not alert to cuddle cat when he first encountered the toy and his response was this, and I quote:
"Eddie was given a cuddly toy as a reward in training so reverted to puppy mode. His initial reaction in playing with the toy was not unusual at all."
Eddie barked at it because cadaver hands fetched it and put it on the bed. I want to see all those photos of Madeleine with her precious cat.
I seem to recall it was also Martin Grime who claimed he recommended the toy be forensically examined ....
She had it at bedtime or if she wasn't feeling well. I see no reason why the McCanns should feel obliged to produce any photos of her cuddling up to it for people on forums to pore over.
Eddie didn't alert to the toy for blood. It was a cadaver alert like he did in another case where he alerted to the suspects diary who wrote in it after he had moved a body.Was Cuddlecat the only object "Cadaver Hands" touched in the apartment then? Not the light switches, not the door handles, not the furniture, not the torn sticker book, not the clothes he was wearing, not the phones he was using, etc etc etc...?
Cornwall, UK
A woman was reported missing by her partner. A search of the suspects
house by the EVRD was conducted who indicated on the living room carpet.
No forensic evidence was recovered. Subsequently a diary written by the
suspect was alert indicated by the dog. The diary had written extracts that the
offender had laid the victim on the carpet whilst dead, the diary had in fact
been written by the suspect having handled the body. This was confirmed by
the offender in interview.
Eddie barked at it because cadaver hands fetched it and put it on the bed. I want to see all those photos of Madeleine with her precious cat.
Was Cuddlecat the only object "Cadaver Hands" touched in the apartment then? Not the light switches, not the door handles, not the furniture, not the torn sticker book, not the clothes he was wearing, not the phones he was using, etc etc etc...?
As if the phantom child stealer would strike again.
Shades of horses and stable doors springs to mind.
From a source who knows MG.
I asked Martin why Eddie did not alert to cuddle cat when he first encountered the toy and his response was this, and I quote:
"Eddie was given a cuddly toy as a reward in training so reverted to puppy mode. His initial reaction in playing with the toy was not unusual at all."
Eddie didn't alert to the toy for blood. It was a cadaver alert like he did in another case where he alerted to the suspects diary who wrote in it after he had handled a body.
Cornwall, UK
A woman was reported missing by her partner. A search of the suspects
house by the EVRD was conducted who indicated on the living room carpet.
No forensic evidence was recovered. Subsequently a diary written by the
suspect was alert indicated by the dog. The diary had written extracts that the
offender had laid the victim on the carpet whilst dead, the diary had in fact
been written by the suspect having handled the body. This was confirmed by
the offender in interview.
that is the point on which she may well be suedWouldn't it be the paper that would be sued not the journo davel?
Wouldn't it be the paper that would be sued not the journo davel?
That's how I see it, Pegasus. The Daily Mail allows comments.Yep I doubt any competent lawyer would advise suing a journo rather than the paper.
Yep I doubt any competent lawyer would advise suing a journo rather than the paper.
The reason why she is so scathing is because she thinks CC was washed after only 5 days. That allegation is completely untrue.
By the time CC was washed weeks later - it no longer resembled the cuddly toy Kate was used to seeing her daughter with. It was really grubby and smelled of suntan lotion. Washing it restored it to how it looked when Madeleine played with it.
KH's comments re CC were because she'd got her facts wrong - and her cruel condemnation of Kate emanated from that IMO. To publically slur someone's character based on a lie is libellous IMO. And if it isn't it should be.
where is your proof ...for what you posted....its you who got the facts wrong ...
excuse me ....it's you who got the facts wrong .......where is your proof ...you provide a cite with what you said you are the one calling K H a libellouse not me ....
or are you like the mccs .....what you say goes ....
So cuddle cat was placed on a ledge? The problem was that there was no ledge in the bedroom.
Still waiting for your cite proving that I got the facts wrong and that Kate washed CC after only 5 days.
IMO you should delete your lie or be given a warning for spreading false information, but I don't suppose either of these things will happen...
i will take Eleanor advice ...and not reply to insults ...be thankful you got a reply.......
No photos but there was a sister website to the original bringmadeleinehome website called cuddlecat.co.uk
Always found that odd up and running so early when no one in the world had any idea what the toy was called and even if they did, why would they google it to find a site dedicated to finding Madeleine?
Eg say when Ben Needham went missing (pretend the Internet was what it is today) we read in the paper his fave toy was thomasthetank, would you google thomasthetank to find news? Iyswim
If you put cuddlecat.co.uk into Wayback, the Find Madeleine website comes up. It was linked to the website from the early days, although it doesn't actually exist now. Perhaps they thought in the early days that people would like to buy a cuddle cat, but abandoned that idea. Googling it now brings up Gerry's blog.more idle (with an undercurrent of spite) speculation. Nice.
DAY 26 - 29/05/2007
4th- OFFICIAL WEBSITE REGISTERED AS
www.cuddlecat.org.uk - LINKED TO
www.cuddlecat.co.uk - LINKED TO
www.findmadeleine.com - LINKED TO
www.bringmadeleinehome.com
DAY 23 6/05/2007
3rd - OFFICIAL WEBSITE REGISTERED AS
www.cuddlecat.co.uk - LINKED TO
www.findmadeleine.com - LINKED TO
www.bringmadeleinehome.com
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DAYS_1_to_50.htm
i will take Eleanor advice ...and not reply to insults ...be thankful you got a reply.......
I have not insulted you in any way.
You claimed as a fact that Kate washed CC after 5 days.
It's against forum rules to make claims which you cannot support.
Asking you to provide the evidence or withdraw your claim - (which IMO is libellous as it intentionally casts a slur on Kate McCann's character by implying that she was cold and unfeeling) - is not unreasonable.
CC.....was no more than a prop...
if it was so sentimental to k mcc ....why did she flaunt it all over the place ...
according to k mcc it was the last thing maddie held...yet she flaunted it for the world to see...
cc should have been the last personal attachment to maddie ....but she used it as a ploy
have we ever seen it since she came back.........has she still got it
when cc was washed ...it became just another toy ....probably now just left some where ...just the same as she left maddie
It was those nasty journalists at the Mirror who started it;
Kate washed the Cuddle Cat five days after Madeleine went missing saying it was smeared with sand and sun cream.
Gerry's sister Philomena said it was cleaned again two months ago because it was filthy after being carried around.
Sunday Mirror report, 13 September 2007
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id60.html
GONCALO AMARAL ON CUDDLE CAT
From his book:
These first observations are not the only ones that lead us to consider a set-up. The way the bed sheets were arranged but also the child's soft toy equally raise doubts.
- Do you see how the sheets are lying? You'd think the child got out by herself....or that she didn't sleep there.
- Someone could have unintentionally touched the curtains while looking for the little girl inside the apartment.
- And the soft toy she slept with? That's not in a natural position either. How would she have found it, along the pillow like that?
- The mother says that the soft toy was beside the pillow when she noticed the disappearance, which, according to her, was its usual place.
- Which means that the little girl slept without holding it? Children normally clutch their security object to fall asleep. But if that's not the case, the way it's placed doesn't seem natural. She would inevitably have moved it turning over in her sleep.
C C was just another P R ploy.....it meant nothing to k mc ....it would have been kept private a personal thing ..for her and maddie ,...not flaunted about...to get filthy and stinking ....according to her ...it was the last thing maddie held ....
CC.....was no more than a prop...Whatever happened to Cuddlecat? Perhaps we could start a subforum to find out, and then strive to seek justice for the poor malodrous abandoned wee toy.
if it was so sentimental to k mcc ....why did she flaunt it all over the place ...
according to k mcc it was the last thing maddie held...yet she flaunted it for the world to see...
cc should have been the last personal attachment to maddie ....but she used it as a ploy
have we ever seen it since she came back.........has she still got it
when cc was washed ...it became just another toy ....probably now just left some where ...just the same as she left maddie
It was those nasty journalists at the Mirror who started it;
Kate washed the Cuddle Cat five days after Madeleine went missing saying it was smeared with sand and sun cream.
Gerry's sister Philomena said it was cleaned again two months ago because it was filthy after being carried around.
Sunday Mirror report, 13 September 2007
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id60.html
Whatever happened to Cuddlecat? Perhaps we could start a subforum to find out, and then strive to seek justice for the poor malodrous abandoned wee toy.
Honestly, some people need to get a grip...
If the mother thought it was potential evidence then she could have handed it in for testing instead of destroying any by washing. After handling the body CC was placed on the bed. Eddie could have checked the pink blanket also placed on the bed but it disappeared.
Please stick within the boundaries of The Topic or posts will be deleted.
Perhaps it might be better to move your post elsewhere, Stephen.
I will try to start a new thread on this Eleanor.
This is the first time in a long time I have seen someone in the mainstream media actually criticizing the McCanns. Shame it has to be Hopkins as I cannot stand the woman and in the past she has expressed some pretty horrendous views, but this article is pretty spot on.
I still have no solid view one way or the other on this whole saga as there is no evidence of anything. The only fact in this case is that Madeleine disappeared from the apartment that she was left in with her baby siblings while the parents had dinner.
People who support them completely seem to be dwindling. By this, I do not mean people who believe in the abduction theory, but those who stuck up for them for EVERYTHING...some people even to this day try to write off the neglectful parenting as something that could happen to anyone. Sorry no, noone who genuinely loved their child would not leave them in that kind of position. It takes a special kind of person (and that is not a compliment) to leave 3 babies in an unlocked apartment alone in a foreign country just so they could have some adult time. Especially after palming the kids off on the creche for the whole holiday too. I still to this day do not understandably why...if this group wanted an adult holiday, they did not arrange childcare at home (maybe the kids could stay with granny, if money was an issue) and go as an adult group.
I don't accept that the McCanns didn't love their children and think it is a ridiculous thing to say
Do you have anything that demonstrates this love? There's a few things that suggest a desire to get away from them as much as possible.
Its not just them. Anyone who leaves their child in such a situation so they can go and have fun.. IMO does not love them.
Well, not as much as they love themselves.Yes, this is probably a better way of putting it.
I think it is a bizarre suggestion that the McCanns didn't love their children...totally bizarre
You'll be able to give the examples I asked for in that case. The examples of how they showed their love for their children on that holiday. All I can see, as I said, is a desire to get away from them.
totally illogical to suggest the mccanns did not love their children....putting your child in a kiddy club does't mean you don't love them
If the McCanns didn't want to be with their kids on holiday they could have dumped them on family and taken off by themselves.Yes indeed, why did they not do this I wonder? Clearly they (and the other adults on the holiday) valued friends time above family time. So why not arrange for the kids to go to grandmas/aunts/etc and they could have gone on an adults only holiday, without worrying to go to the creche every few hours to pickup/drop off the children, and would have been able to sit and eat a meal on a night without indigestion from getting up to check on the kids every few mins.
You are quick to deny my points but are unable to come up with any to support your position. How (not) unusual.
Yes indeed, why did they not do this I wonder? Clearly they (and the other adults on the holiday) valued friends time above family time. So why not arrange for the kids to go to grandmas/aunts/etc and they could have gone on an adults only holiday, without worrying to go to the creche every few hours to pickup/drop off the children, and would have been able to sit and eat a meal on a night without indigestion from getting up to check on the kids every few mins.Maybe it's because they loved their kids and wanted them to have a nice time i. the sun too? Crazy thought I know!
Yes indeed, why did they not do this I wonder? Clearly they (and the other adults on the holiday) valued friends time above family time. So why not arrange for the kids to go to grandmas/aunts/etc and they could have gone on an adults only holiday, without worrying to go to the creche every few hours to pickup/drop off the children, and would have been able to sit and eat a meal on a night without indigestion from getting up to check on the kids every few mins.
Maybe it's because they loved their kids and wanted them to have a nice time i. the sun too? Crazy thought I know!But they were in the creche pretty much all day everyday, then alone at night? Thats not a family holiday
because they loved their children and wanted them with themThey weren't with them though..bar an hour or two per day.
your statement is so ridiculous......How many mothers do you know who do not love their children... I don't know any...as I said it is genetically programmedHow many mothers convicted of infanticide have to be dredged up before you manage to see the truth?
Maybe it's because they loved their kids and wanted them to have a nice time i. the sun too? Crazy thought I know!
Amazing isn't it. It's so dreadful to take your children with you on holiday and use the facilities for children to have fun and share their time with other children, but would be so much better to leave them at home with relatives. Small children would fret at being away from their parents for a whole week, but some seem to think it is much more fretful for them to be apart from their parents for an hour or so. Strange thinking IMO.If your plan is to leave the kids unattended in an unlocked apartment next to a large swimming pool and rather dangerous steps and such, then yes. It would be much better to leave them at home with relatives.
How many mothers convicted of infanticide have to be dredged up before you manage to see the truth?
But they were in the creche pretty much all day everyday, then alone at night? Thats not a family holidayin you opinion however I think you'll find that their holiday was marketed as a family holiday and that kids clubs and creches exist to cater for families. You may be one of those parents who can't bear to be separated from their children for more than 10 seconds but not everyone is the same, it doesn't mean the parents don't love and care for their kids. Where do you stand on working mothers whose kids spend all day in nurseries? Less in love with their kids than those who spend all day drudging at home for them I bet!
If your plan is to leave the kids unattended in an unlocked apartment next to a large swimming pool and rather dangerous steps and such, then yes. It would be much better to leave them at home with relatives.
The creche part is nothing, until you couple it with also leaving the kids on a nighttime to have more adult fun...
in you opinion however I think you'll find that their holiday was marketed as a family holiday and that kids clubs and creches exist to cater for families. You may be one of those parents who can't bear to be separated from their children for more than 10 seconds but not everyone is the same, it doesn't mean the parents don't love and care for their kids. Where do you stand on working mothers whose kids spend all day in nurseries? Less in love with their kids than those who spend all day drudging at home for them I bet!OH this is one of those forums then, where if a differing opinion happens things quickly go personal? great :D
Great. I only started reading the forum last night though so as such I am pretty much starting from scratch. I don't mind if people don't answer me as they have been over the point several times before
this has already been discussed several years ago
OH this is one of those forums then, where if a differing opinion happens things quickly go personal? great :DI understand your opinion ...but that's all it is ...your opinion and has no real value
My opinion on working mothers is that they do what they have to do to get by. Of course it doesn't mean they love their children any less than non-working parents. Sorry your bet is wrong.
Also I can leave my kids for 10 seconds thanks..have used creche facilities before on holidays. What I have not done is chuck the kids into the creche at all hours imaginable and then put them to bed, leave them alone so I can go out with the adults, not giving a second thought to the babies I am abandoning.
Also, my point about not loving the kids had NOTHING to do with the creche. I simply stated that a parent who would willingly put their child in the position that Madeleine was in that night, IMO does not love their kids as a parent should. Not sure why its been twisted beyond all recognition now but oh well...
I understand your opinion ...but that's all it is ...your opinion and has no real valueYeah, just like everyone elses @)(++(* Unfortunately all there is to go on this case is opinion, as there is not a jot of evidence for any of the possible theories that have been put forward.
OH this is one of those forums then, where if a differing opinion happens things quickly go personal? great :DHow should a parent love their child then? Do tell us, you seem to be the expert.
My opinion on working mothers is that they do what they have to do to get by. Of course it doesn't mean they love their children any less than non-working parents. Sorry your bet is wrong.
Also I can leave my kids for 10 seconds thanks..have used creche facilities before on holidays. What I have not done is chuck the kids into the creche at all hours imaginable and then put them to bed, leave them alone so I can go out with the adults, not giving a second thought to the babies I am abandoning.
Also, my point about not loving the kids had NOTHING to do with the creche. I simply stated that a parent who would willingly put their child in the position that Madeleine was in that night, IMO does not love their kids as a parent should. Not sure why its been twisted beyond all recognition now but oh well...
OH this is one of those forums then, where if a differing opinion happens things quickly go personal? great :Dwhat about working mothers who don't work to get by but who work because they want to, and enjoy their work and progessing in their career, and who dump their kids in nurseries in order to do so, are they generally less loving than the struggling mums in full time work IYO?
My opinion on working mothers is that they do what they have to do to get by. Of course it doesn't mean they love their children any less than non-working parents. Sorry your bet is wrong.
Also I can leave my kids for 10 seconds thanks..have used creche facilities before on holidays. What I have not done is chuck the kids into the creche at all hours imaginable and then put them to bed, leave them alone so I can go out with the adults, not giving a second thought to the babies I am abandoning.
Also, my point about not loving the kids had NOTHING to do with the creche. I simply stated that a parent who would willingly put their child in the position that Madeleine was in that night, IMO does not love their kids as a parent should. Not sure why its been twisted beyond all recognition now but oh well...
How should a parent love their child then? Do tell us, you seem to be the expert.
One way NOT to love your child though is to purposely put them in harms way and not give a crap about it. Being so selfish that you do not stop to consider what could happen, even after your child tells you they were crying for you when you weren't there the night before. To still leave them alone to go for adult time, is quite disgusting. i can't believe people are arguing that behaving in this way is perfectly fine @)(++(* @)(++(*Who is arguing that? you seem to be arguing that the McCanns didn't love their kids properly, I am challenging that belief.
what about working mothers who don't work to get by but who work because they want to, and enjoy their work and progessing in their career, and who dump their kids in nurseries in order to do so, are they generally less loving than the struggling mums in full time work IYO?Depends..do they leave their kids alone in a strange and dangerous environment also so they can go out have fun? if so then...they are bad parents. In my opinion...which has been pointed out as if I didnt know..is just my opinion :)
Who is arguing that? you seem to be arguing that the McCanns didn't love their kids properly, I am challenging that belief.But my belief is held because they were selfish enough to leave Madeleine in the situation that they did. Nothing to do with creches and childcare.
Yeah, just like everyone elses @)(++(* Unfortunately all there is to go on this case is opinion, as there is not a jot of evidence for any of the possible theories that have been put forward.
But my belief is held because they were selfish enough to leave Madeleine in the situation that they did. Nothing to do with creches and childcare.Erm...just now you were berating them for putting them in the kids club all day weren't you?
your statement is so ridiculous......How many mothers do you know who do not love their children... I don't know any...as I said it is genetically programmed
Erm...just now you were berating them for putting them in the kids club all day weren't you?When it is coupled with leaving them on their own at night, it hardly adds up to being a family holiday...was more my point. But as with everything else that has been twisted now too
If your plan is to leave the kids unattended in an unlocked apartment next to a large swimming pool and rather dangerous steps and such, then yes. It would be much better to leave them at home with relatives.
The creche part is nothing, until you couple it with also leaving the kids on a nighttime to have more adult fun...
When it is coupled with leaving them on their own at night, it hardly adds up to being a family holiday...was more my point. But as with everything else that has been twisted now tooif the mcCanns really didn't care about their kids they would have taken themselves off out into PdL or further afield to go clubbing and boozing, they demonstrated that they cared about them by checking on them at regular intervals and sitting withing sight of their apartment. Scoff and jeer at that as much as you like, it chamges nothing.
Yes, I said they probably should have left the kids at home if all they wanted was an adult holiday. I come to that conclusion (that they wanted an adult holiday) as they put the kids in the creche all hours, and then left them alone at night so they could go out. I do not think someone who leaves their babies alone in a dangerous position so they can go out and enjoy themselves cares very much about said children. Is this clearer?
I don't know if people actually aren't understanding me or are deliberately trying to twist my words
I assume by "adult fun" you mean having dinner with friends.
As a "loving parent" I would never have left small children with any relative for more than two days, nor would I have ever, ever have gone back to work before my children began school even though we had to make real sacrifices to do so.
So am I a perfect loving parent?
Do I think that anyone who has made differing choices to be a less than perfect loving parent?
When it is coupled with leaving them on their own at night, it hardly adds up to being a family holiday...was more my point. But as with everything else that has been twisted now too
Yes, I said they probably should have left the kids at home if all they wanted was an adult holiday. I come to that conclusion (that they wanted an adult holiday) as they put the kids in the creche all hours, and then left them alone at night so they could go out. I do not think someone who leaves their babies alone in a dangerous position so they can go out and enjoy themselves cares very much about said children. Is this clearer?
I don't know if people actually aren't understanding me or are deliberately trying to twist my words
You have never heard of those mothers who gaze at their new baby and wait for that rush of maternal love which doesn't arrive then? You have never heard of those mothers who just feel.......nothing? what a sheltered life you must live.
Now, examples of how loving the parents were during the holiday?
I think it went a bit further than that.
There were all those sporty activities laid on for adults as well.
if the mcCanns really didn't care about their kids they would have taken themselves off out into PdL or further afield to go clubbing and boozing, they demonstrated that they cared about them by checking on them at regular intervals and sitting withing sight of their apartment. Scoff and jeer at that as much as you like, it chamges nothing.
What "sporty activities" ?
Is this some code for "adult fun"?
I assume by "adult fun" you mean having dinner with friends.I don't think there is a definition of a loving parent.
As a "loving parent" I would never have left small children with any relative for more than two days, nor would I have ever, ever have gone back to work before my children began school even though we had to make real sacrifices to do so.
So am I a perfect loving parent?
Do I think that anyone who has made differing choices to be a less than perfect loving parent?
They understand only too well Vicky, don't worry. @)(++(*
Depends..do they leave their kids alone in a strange and dangerous environment also so they can go out have fun? if so then...they are bad parents. In my opinion...which has been pointed out as if I didnt know..is just my opinion :)
If it helps, the mother who has been in the papers recently for leaving her 2 year old alone to work..and said 2 year old died in a fire, I think the same of her as I think of the McCanns (back then..I do believe they bother with childcare now, having learnt the hard way)
Tennis, sailing, windsurfing - probably some others as well.
I don't think there is a definition of a loving parent.
Just in my opinion, someone who can leave their children in such a dangerous position with no thought for what may happen (AND the night after one of the children told then they were crying the night before, alone) does not love their child enough to put them first.
Not sure why such a fuss has been made over this to be quite honest. Wish I had never bothered posting in the first place as everything just gets twisted and picked over by the looks of it. Hell I don't even think the parents are guilty of anything bar neglect @)(++(*
I don't think there is a definition of a loving parent.
Just in my opinion, someone who can leave their children in such a dangerous position with no thought for what may happen (AND the night after one of the children told then they were crying the night before, alone) does not love their child enough to put them first.
Not sure why such a fuss has been made over this to be quite honest. Wish I had never bothered posting in the first place as everything just gets twisted and picked over by the looks of it. Hell I don't even think the parents are guilty of anything bar neglect @)(++(*
and the drinking in the evenings as well, with the odd bit of food (that's why it is called a tapas) just to keep them going.
Well a steak doesn't sound like an odd bit of food to me Stephen, and they had starters, are you trying to start another myth to make out the McCann's and friends were just out drinking?
I suppose we have to quantify what is neglect.
Perhaps when one has witnessed, professionally, appalling neglect it does colour one's judgement. Also I have seen many parent's dine in a hotel with their children sleeping in a room quite some distance away.
Also seen parent's drink in a bar while their children run madly round a pool ................French parents, so not Brits this time.
No Lace.
So do you take 3 or 4 hours to eat a steak, or a few starters ?
and how did you know they had steak ?
Have you been to a tapas ?
Good grief Stephen haven't you read the statements?
Same hear Erngath, parents drinking with their small children in the pool, lying sunbathing with their eyes shut even going to sleep.
Parents letting children lie on air beds in the sea while they sun bathe. I read an article in the paper about a tiny baby I think about 5 months old, floating out to sea and had to be rescued, the parents said they forgot about her!!!
How long does it take to eat a steak ?
How long does it take to eat a steak ?
Depends how tough it is. ?{)(**
The McCann's had childcare before their holiday in Portugal, which makes me tend to believe they were acting out of the norm for them.
Again the vast majority of mothers love their children...the human race would not survive if it didnt...a very smallnumber of mothers do feel nothing....very very very small...probably part of PND... I have had seven children so spent many hours..days...in maternity...more than most no doubt and have only seen love and joy.
I would appreciate it if you refrained from making personal comments about me and my life. You know nothing about me and never will.that paragraph in full:
One third of mothers don't fall in love immediately. Most do so later, but not immediately;
Pediatrician and childhood development expert Marshall Klaus estimates that about 30 percent of mothers don't immediately fall in love with their babies
http://consumer.healthday.com/encyclopedia/parenting-31/parenting-health-news-525/falling-in-love-with-your-baby-643058.html
that paragraph in full:
Delayed bonding
In some cases, missing out on the birth experience may actually make it easier to bond with a child. Pediatrician and childhood development expert Marshall Klaus estimates that about 30 percent of mothers don't immediately fall in love with their babies, often because the newborn or the birth process wasn't what they expected. Disappointment, stress, or exhaustion can be enough to drown out the powerful hormones of love, but only temporarily. The vast majority of parents grow attached to their babies within the first few months.
One third of mothers don't fall in love immediately. Most do so later, but not immediately;
Pediatrician and childhood development expert Marshall Klaus estimates that about 30 percent of mothers don't immediately fall in love with their babies
http://consumer.healthday.com/encyclopedia/parenting-31/parenting-health-news-525/falling-in-love-with-your-baby-643058.html
One third of mothers don't fall in love immediately. Most do so later, but not immediately;
Pediatrician and childhood development expert Marshall Klaus estimates that about 30 percent of mothers don't immediately fall in love with their babies
http://consumer.healthday.com/encyclopedia/parenting-31/parenting-health-news-525/falling-in-love-with-your-baby-643058.html