It would an appropriate to balance the questions on this forum about trolls , not just from those who don't believe the McCann's., but also from those on the other extreme.
It is very clear cut, that other than individual posters, on here or elsewhere, people are labelled trolls by some of the McCann supporting fraternity, merely because they don't swallow abduction.
I have also seen for myself major abuse of Amaral, Grime , Brown.
Yet I see denials from some of the supporters.
It seems they only have sympathy for the Mccanns and no one else.
I think two things come into play here:
1 The pscychology of being a team supporter.
2 The desire to belong to an extended family.
I think two things come into play here:
1 The pscychology of being a team supporter.
2 The desire to belong to an extended family.
Shows how little you understand
Several posters have given their views and they concur exactly as to why I post
It's a belief in justice and the rule of law... not the rule of the mob
A dislike of bullies
What I am aware of is the double standards of some McCann supporters and their unwillingness to accept there are trolls in their own ranks.
I think you mean there not their
The abuse heaped upon the McCanns is an absolute disgrace
And how many times have you and Carly criticised typos by me
This case wouldn't exist, but for the McCann's behaviour.
Your post also marks the hypocrisy and propaganda of some of the McCann support base, and is quite intentional.
I note you have no problem with the other thread, but one which discusses the behaviour of some McCann supporters is frowned at.
And how many times have you and Carly criticised typos by me
So both you and Carly are trolls
What a ridiculous thread you have started
Rubbish.
This thread is for people like you who won't admit there are trolls and abusers within your ranks.
However, not to worry, that will be dealt with in due course.
Yes Stephen
Come the revolution we will all be lined up against the wall and shot
Shows how little you understand
Several posters have given their views and they concur exactly as to why I post
It's a belief in justice and the rule of law... not the rule of the mob
A dislike of bullies
With all due respect to John's forum if you really believe that, why do you not protest somewhere with a more substantial outreach ?Give me a gun.
To you and your post's likers I would ask, why without exception do you bully posters who do not share your views, particularly new members, whilst protesting how you abhor bullies ?
I fear "you all become your enemy in the instant that you preach".
Give me a gun.
I certainly shall not. Why should you have all the fun? 8(0(*
I can shoot a 12 bore.That's Alice taken care of then. @)(++(*
That's Alice taken care of then. @)(++(*
That's Alice taken care of then. @)(++(*
I can shoot one but not necessarily hit what I aim at. Also I haven't got one.Never mind, we can come up with a plan B. 8(0(*
With all due respect to John's forum if you really believe that, why do you not protest somewhere with a more substantial outreach ?No I don't
To you and your post's likers I would ask, why without exception do you bully posters who do not share your views, particularly new members, whilst protesting how you abhor bullies ?
I fear "you all become your enemy in the instant that you preach".
Never mind, we can come up with a plan B. 8(0(*
Madeleine and her siblings suffered the consequences of her parents actions in looking after them, and placing their children in needless danger.
How can I be persecuting the McCann's dave ?
They are responsible for what they did.
Not me, or any other poster, blogger, etc., on the net.
Now try referring to the thread title, and refer to those extreme Mccann supports, instead of trying to divert, as usual ?
I don't think you understand that those who support the McCanns are actually supporting Madeleine's right to be
searched for & for the person/people who were responsible for removing her from her family to be brought to justice. Those who can only attack the McCanns or promote their own version of what Madeleine's parents did to her serve no purpose other than demonstrate that they would not be people you could rely on in the face of adversity.
That Misty is a matter of opinion.
You fail to realize it seems, I and others have seen the extensive troll attacks on those who question the McCann's.
Likewise, you do not know what happened that night in Portugal, and you do not know if the McCann's version of events is what occurred. That is your belief, and is not shared by many others.
Newer forget that.
That Misty is a matter of opinion.
You fail to realize it seems, I and others have seen the extensive troll attacks on those who question the McCann's.
Likewise, you do not know what happened that night in Portugal, and you do not know if the McCann's version of events is what occurred. That is your belief, and is not shared by many others.
Newer forget that.
People don't just question the McCanns actions, though, Stephen. They stalk the McCann children & other people helping the McCanns, they denigrate the SY investigation at every turn, they produce derogatory videos, organise multiple petitions against the parents, spend hours & hours repeating the same rubbish, they raise money to support an ex-cop who thinks as they do.....what reasonable person wouldn't be revolted by such extreme organised propaganda?
Tell me, what did Madeleine do so wrong in all this that makes people want to convict her parents rather than see them be the driving force behind finding her?
No I don't
As the bully protests
Why are you bullying me
I have no problem with those that don't share my views
I have a problemwith those that continually harass and persecute a couple who have lost their child in tragic circumstances
I have a problem with those who want to add to their misery
I have a problem with bullies
The propaganda is yours, yet again, as is the McCann's.
As to what the McCann's did wrong ?
Where is Madeleine ?
I would argue that you have a huge problem with those who don't share your views. You often accuse those who disagree with you of lacking intellectual prowess. They don't understand evidence, they don't understand logic, they don't understand the dog alerts......
People don't just question the McCanns actions, though, Stephen. They stalk the McCann children & other people helping the McCanns, they denigrate the SY investigation at every turn, they produce derogatory videos, organise multiple petitions against the parents, spend hours & hours repeating the same rubbish, they raise money to support an ex-cop who thinks as they do.....what reasonable person wouldn't be revolted by such extreme organised propaganda?
Tell me, what did Madeleine do so wrong in all this that makes people want to convict her parents rather than see them be the driving force behind finding her?
What did maddie do so wrong, maddie did nothing wrong.
Apart from belonging to people she trusted, who let her down.
People don't just question the McCanns actions, though, Stephen. They stalk the McCann children & other people helping the McCanns, they denigrate the SY investigation at every turn, they produce derogatory videos, organise multiple petitions against the parents, spend hours & hours repeating the same rubbish, they raise money to support an ex-cop who thinks as they do.....what reasonable person wouldn't be revolted by such extreme organised propaganda?
Tell me, what did Madeleine do so wrong in all this that makes people want to convict her parents rather than see them be the driving force behind finding her?
Many parents let their children down but most don't suffer such terrible consequences. Would you rather the McCanns just throw in the towel & leave the trolls to gloat for another 20 years?
Everyone interested decides on their own position and then proceeds according to their own conscience. Continually expressing outrage on behalf of the McCanns achieves what exactly? The video makers are spreading their views without caring if you're outraged. The fund raisers achieved what they set out to do although one had to retire injured by your fellow supporters. Operation Grange staggers on despite the criticism levelled at it, as do the McCanns. I don't suppose either of them know or care about your outrage on their behalf.
I wasn't aware I spent any time expressing outrage on behalf of the McCanns; rather, I defend their right to be seen as innocent until proven otherwise in a court of law. Sadly, most of the posters who liked to discuss the case rather than the personalities have been driven away by the relentless negativity of those who find the direction the police investigations appear to be taking unacceptable.
Was the fund raiser who was driven away the same one who now claims to have been a journalist since 2014?
The evidence available doesn't allow identification of the crime. The parents came under suspicion but were never charged due to insufficient evidence. Seeing them as innocent is, therefore, a choice.This forum has NEVER accepted abduction as a fact, not even mostly, so you're mistaken about that.
When I joined the forum there was indeed a group discussing the case. The abduction was mostly accepted as a fact and all the discussion seemed to consist of speculation about it. Who watched the apartment, where from, if the abductor had a car or an accomplice.
I thought the fundraiser was a student. That doesn't, of course, exclude doing paid work. I worked when I was a student.
I can shoot a 12 bore.You want to see the whites of their eyes as you pull the trigger.
This forum has NEVER accepted abduction as a fact, not even mostly, so you're mistaken about that.
The McCanns have the right to be seen as innocent and should be accorded the benefit of the doubt IMO. Doubts should be kept to oneself as expressing them publicly does nothing positive to bring about justice but can do harm, if the people on the receiving end suffer as a result. And even if the McCanns are as guilty as sin then how does slagging them off and "doubting" them day in, day out actually benefit anyone or anything?
Quite right;
The supporters believe only in abduction; sceptics are sceptical about abduction
if you have read my posts I say abduction is the most likely scenario based on the evidence
if you have read my posts I say abduction is the most likely scenario based on the evidence
The evidence you have presented is not very convincing unfortunatly.
Fortunately it doesn't matter if you and others here are not convinced by the evidence. Only SY matter.
What evidence are you referring to ?
Remembering of course, that members of the met, contributed to Amaral's legal fund.
Which would tend to suggest that members of the Met don't believe in abduction. 8**8:/:
Allegedly! 8**8:/: 8**8:/: 8**8:/:
What evidence are you referring to ?wheres the evidence taht met officers contributed
Remembering of course, that members of the met, contributed to Amaral's legal fund.
Which would tend to suggest that members of the Met don't believe in abduction. 8**8:/:
wheres the evidence taht met officers contributed
Fortunately it doesn't matter if you and others here are not convinced by the evidence. Only SY matter.
Part of your 'evidence' was that SY believed the abduction thesis, wasn't it? How did they convince themselves I wonder? Perhaps their remit convinced them.
Either way, SY are not the ones that matter - the PJ and the Portuguese Judiciary are the only ones that matter. The case is a Portuguese case and any prosecution will be a Portuguese prosecution.
Part of your 'evidence' was that SY believed the abduction thesis, wasn't it? How did they convince themselves I wonder? Perhaps their remit convinced them.
Either way, SY are not the ones that matter - the PJ and the Portuguese Judiciary are the only ones that matter. The case is a Portuguese case and any prosecution will be a Portuguese prosecution.
if SY find evidence then the pj will have to act on it......of course SY matter
The evidence you have presented is not very convincing unfortunatly.
I was about to say something similar myself.
the only police force investigting is looking for an abductor...
Same as your claim that some of the Met police contributing to Amaral's fund. @)(++(*
Same as your proof for the some met police contributing to Amaral's fund. @)(++(*
What evidence are you referring to ?
Remembering of course, that members of the met, contributed to Amaral's legal fund.
Which would tend to suggest that members of the Met don't believe in abduction. 8**8:/:
There are two sides to this case, one side believe the McCann's version of events and the other side don't.
Isn't it strange that one side is being accused of being obsessed in supporting the McCann's, for believing there was an abduction.
Why don't we take the McCann's out of the frame, and just call it 'for abduction' and 'against abduction' that is what it all boils down to, as obviously if the side who believe in abduction will be agreeing with the McCann's, it doesn't mean that side is 'obsessed in supporting the McCann's' at all.
Quote - remembering of course, that members of the met, contributed to Amaral's legal fund unquote yet the pro McCann's are being called 'obsessed'.
I agree Lace.Strange that those who spend an inordinate time and effort in posting against an abduction are not labelled obsessive.
How is Met officers and others contributing to Amaral's fund obsessive ?
You had no objections to people donating to the Mccanns. 8)--))
Donating to the fund for Madeleine, you mean.
So remind me, with data.
How much of the fund has been used for searching.
Newtons's Third Law of Motion in action. 8(0(*
Do your own research.
lace 2870 posts
Erngarth 228
stephen 18169
so who is obsessive....LOL
With a not insignificant 19033 yourself, are you too not an obsessive ? 8)-)))
Newtons's Third Law of Motion in action. 8(0(*
lace 2870 posts
Erngarth 228
stephen 18169
so who is obsessive....LOL
I will have to try harder. 8()-000(
I will have to try harder. 8()-000(
You forgot davel. *&*%£
Just checked
Over 19000. 8)--))
Davel didn't start this thread about being obsessed. 8((()*/
Well you have certainly upscaled since the Supreme Court. 8(*(8(*(
Is there an indication of posts made BSC and ASC. Have you checked my posting statistics?
lace 2870 posts
Erngarth 228
stephen 18169
so who is obsessive....LOL
Im not calling others obsessive...stephen is
Observation my dear.
Mostly before, it was about 'likes'.
There are two sides to this case, one side believe the McCann's version of events and the other side don't.
Isn't it strange that one side is being accused of being obsessed in supporting the McCann's, for believing there was an abduction.
Why don't we take the McCann's out of the frame, and just call it 'for abduction' and 'against abduction' that is what it all boils down to, as obviously if the side who believe in abduction will be agreeing with the McCann's, it doesn't mean that side is 'obsessed in supporting the McCann's' at all.
Really?
Well I'll take your word for that as you do spend much, much more time here than I do.
Abduction is inseperable from the McCanns because it's their theory. They suggested it and they have promoted it ever since. Would the authorities have decided that Madeleine was abducted if they had been left to investigate in peace? I very much doubt it. I think their attention would have turned to the parents much sooner than it did.
Abduction is inseperable from the McCanns because it's their theory. They suggested it and they have promoted it ever since. Would the authorities have decided that Madeleine was abducted if they had been left to investigate in peace? I very much doubt it. I think their attention would have turned to the parents much sooner than it did.
But it isn't only the McCanns who claim abduction - the Tapas 7 also do.
The idea that those people would risk the ruination of their own children's lives and put their own freedom in danger for a couple who some were not even friends with - let alone close friends - is way too far fetched for me. Normal decent people would never agree to get involved in such a heinous crime - and they are all normal decent people IMO.
I wouldn't do it and I don't know anyone who would in those circumstances - and I will never believe that Fiona Payne would encourage her own elderly mum to commit any crime - let alone one so serious that it could have resulted in her being arrested in a foreign country and being charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice! Not a chance in hell of her agreeing to put her at that risk IMO.
There was nothing to stop the PJ from investigating anything or anyone they wanted to - they were in charge. The reason they failed IMO is because there were no official guidelines for them to follow and because they took the investigation in the wrong direction once they decided to pin the crime on the mother - on the strength of a dream she'd had.
Abduction is inseperable from the McCanns because it's their theory. They suggested it and they have promoted it ever since. Would the authorities have decided that Madeleine was abducted if they had been left to investigate in peace? I very much doubt it. I think their attention would have turned to the parents much sooner than it did.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
You just can't get the public prosecutors these days.
Well, not in Portugal, anyway.
Abduction is inseperable from the McCanns because it's their theory. They suggested it and they have promoted it ever since. Would the authorities have decided that Madeleine was abducted if they had been left to investigate in peace? I very much doubt it. I think their attention would have turned to the parents much sooner than it did.
theres no incriminating evidence against the parents
How would you know what the Police know or don't know ?
because the archiving report told us
What about now dave ?
If it helps, I was talking in the present tense. 8**8:/:
if you think the mccanns are being investigated its not the present tense you are talking
Try reading again.
But it isn't only the McCanns who claim abduction - the Tapas 7 also do.
The idea that those people would risk the ruination of their own children's lives and put their own freedom in danger for a couple who some were not even friends with - let alone close friends - is way too far fetched for me. Normal decent people would never agree to get involved in such a heinous crime - and they are all normal decent people IMO.
I wouldn't do it and I don't know anyone who would in those circumstances - and I will never believe that Fiona Payne would encourage her own elderly mum to commit any crime - let alone one so serious that it could have resulted in her being arrested in a foreign country and being charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice! Not a chance in hell of her agreeing to put her at that risk IMO.
There was nothing to stop the PJ from investigating anything or anyone they wanted to - they were in charge. The reason they failed IMO is because there were no official guidelines for them to follow and because they took the investigation in the wrong direction once they decided to pin the crime on the mother - on the strength of a dream she'd had.
With the exception of Jane Tanner the Tapas 7 have never publicly claimed anything. Jane Tanner apparently saw another holidaymaker with his child and assumed she had seen an abductor taking Madeleine. While Gerry McCann was phoning his relatives talking about paedophile gangs his three male companions were out scouring the village for his daughter.
It is unprecedented for not just the British Consul (whose job it is) but the British Ambassador (whose job it is not) to attend as quickly as they did. It has been alleged that they interfered in the investigation. By the time the PJ had finished all the interviews they were being showered with information and sightings due to appeals in the UK media. The PJ doing the actual work were not in charge; Encarnacao, Neves and the Public Prosecutors were.
If you think the PJ suspected Kate McCann because she had a dream you need to read up on the subject.
maddies disappearance was unprecedented....the pj suspected the mccans because they misunderstood the dog alerts...
They did their job.
So, the case is over.
Time to adjust to that ferryman.
The public prosecutors did their job.
The first-instance judge did her job.
The case isn't over.
The public prosecutors did their job.
The first-instance judge did her job.
The Appeal Court judges did their job.
The Supreme Court Judges did their job (twice).
The case is over.
The case isn't over until it is found out what happened to Madeleine McCann.
The public prosecutors did their job.
The first-instance judge did her job.
The Appeal Court judges did their job.
The Supreme Court Judges did their job (twice).
The case is over.
The case in question was a damages action brought by the McCanns.
The case is about Madeleine McCann.
The public prosecutors did their job.
The first-instance judge did her job.
The case isn't over.
The case is about Madeleine McCann.
The case isn't over until it is found out what happened to Madeleine McCann.
Where is her name on the court files against Amaral ?
Where is her name on the court files against Amaral ?
Her name along with those of Amelie and Sean were on the original writ but the judge of First Instance booted them into touch.
Exactly.Just to keep the case simple.
Just to keep the case simple.
Oh dear. &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+Well it would be hard to determine how much Madeleine was damaged by Amaral's book when no one knew where she was at the time.
Well it would be hard to determine how much Madeleine was damaged by Amaral's book when know one knew where she was at the time.
They claimed that the book harmed the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. Quite how I don't know because the investigation was shelved before the book came out."The investigation" is obviously more than the Portuguese investigation.
These facts deprive the 3rd claimant of the just and apropriate investigation of her disappearance. [The book, DVD and interviews]
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
Her name along with those of Amelie and Sean were on the original writ but the judge of First Instance booted them into touch.
Please take note of the thread topic. "Why are some people so obsessed in supporting the Mccanns ?"
Bearing in mind that this is the UK Justice Forum ... one would have assumed that is self explanatory.
Madeleine McCann will soon have been missing for nearly ten years ... throughout that time there have been individuals who have left no stone unturned to obstruct and derail in every which way they can any and every initiative to find her or to at least find out what happened.
That goes from denigrating the fund set up to finance the search for her, when no-one else was, to denigrating the forces of law and order who belatedly were allowed to reopen the prematurely shelved case to find her.
Madeleine McCann's parents are the catalyst and the moving force for keeping the fight to find Madeleine going for over that period of nearly ten years.
Madeleine's parents have fallen foul of those individuals who have striven with every fibre of their being to have Madeleine written off as dead ... without one single shred of evidence to support their obsession with the death of that child.
Madeleine's parents are deserving of moral support for the simple reason the vile opprobrium they have attracted from those in a very dark corner of the internet is in direct proportion to their efforts on behalf of their daughter.
A good example.
A good example.of what?
A good example.
of what?
I wouldn't have posted it had I not thought so too.
It rather seems that you do not find anything abhorrent about individuals taking it upon themselves to obstruct attempts to search for a missing person and keep it going for a ten year period.
That extraordinary fact is one example of the loathing that has been deliberately engendered against this family. One doesn't have to stretch the imagination too far to see why such aberrant conduct is anathema and why there are people who can recognise the organised wrong doing being perpetrated with malice aforethought by what in my opinion are online cowards and bullies.
Who has obstructed the so called 'search' ?
You need to grasp reality.
There is no automatic right that the Mccanns should be believed.
It is also abundantly obvious, no matter your attempted hype, that no trace of Madeleine has been found since she disappeared.
With the exception of Jane Tanner the Tapas 7 have never publicly claimed anything. Jane Tanner apparently saw another holidaymaker with his child and assumed she had seen an abductor taking Madeleine. While Gerry McCann was phoning his relatives talking about paedophile gangs his three male companions were out scouring the village for his daughter.
It is unprecedented for not just the British Consul (whose job it is) but the British Ambassador (whose job it is not) to attend as quickly as they did. It has been alleged that they interfered in the investigation. By the time the PJ had finished all the interviews they were being showered with information and sightings due to appeals in the UK media. The PJ doing the actual work were not in charge; Encarnacao, Neves and the Public Prosecutors were.
If you think the PJ suspected Kate McCann because she had a dream you need to read up on the subject.
why dont they care about other missing kids? 1000s of kids vanish everyday?? why do they just care about maddie?
why dont they care about other missing kids? 1000s of kids vanish everyday?? why do they just care about maddie?
What you claim is simply not true, Of course they care about other missing children which is why they have raised thousands of pound for the Missing People Charity and also donated thousands of pounds to that charity.
Have you forgotten about the following:
QUOTE from Wales on Line.
Coral Jones and Mrs McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, unveiled a digital billboard at King’s Cross station in London promoting an enhanced Child Rescue Alerts system to inform the public about missing children whose lives are considered at risk.
The scheme will use social media including text messages, email and digital billboards across the UK in addition to traditional broadcast media to issue the alerts when it is launched on Sunday, International Missing Children’s Day.
The scheme, the responsibility of the National Crime Agency (NCA) in partnership with the charity Missing People and the company Groupcall Limited, already has 25,000 people signed up.
End quote.
No doubt you will want to withdraw your claim that ''they just care about Maddie', But I won't hold my breath eh?
The obsession.I take it you are having a sly dig at your colleague Brietta? There was nothing remotely obsessive about Brietta's post though she does describe some pretty obsessive hating behaviour. I suppose you're blind to that though.
Have you never even seen once the irony of Kate Mccann being made an Ambassador for the Missing Peoples Charity, after what shew and her husband did in leaving their children undefended and by themselves, with infrequent 'checks', not all verified ?
What you claim is simply not true, Of course they care about other missing children which is why they have raised thousands of pound for the Missing People Charity and also donated thousands of pounds to that charity.
Have you forgotten about the following:
QUOTE from Wales on Line.
Coral Jones and Mrs McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, unveiled a digital billboard at King’s Cross station in London promoting an enhanced Child Rescue Alerts system to inform the public about missing children whose lives are considered at risk.
The scheme will use social media including text messages, email and digital billboards across the UK in addition to traditional broadcast media to issue the alerts when it is launched on Sunday, International Missing Children’s Day.
The scheme, the responsibility of the National Crime Agency (NCA) in partnership with the charity Missing People and the company Groupcall Limited, already has 25,000 people signed up.
End quote.
No doubt you will want to withdraw your claim that ''they just care about Maddie', But I won't hold my breath eh?
Carly claimed that the McCanns did not care about other missing children. I posted evidence to show how wrong she was. I see you have ignored those points.
Your habit of countering any post - (no matter what is being discussed in it)- by repeating the same 'they left their kids' mantra over and over and over and over again could not be more obsessional IMO.
Awaits the usual childish tit for tat (no it's not me - it's you) reply.
i was talking about supporters not caring about other kids not the mcannsHow do you know what we do and don't care about?
i was talking about supporters not caring about other kids not the mcanns
How do you know what we do and don't care about?
It is interesting to observe, that some McCann supporters questions the motives of 'sceptics', but aren't prepared for the tables to be turned.Unless you think our motives are in some way criminal ie: knowingly supporting criminals to evade justice I don't really see what is so shockingly awful about people defending the parents of a missing child online against the torrent of suspicion, abuse and vitriol that is heaped upon them on a daily basis. OK, some of us (most of us?) might be considered obsessive if by that you mean we log on here every day to discuss the issue but I'd rather be considered an obsessive supporter of people that I believe to be innocent than an obsessive hate monger of people that I believe are hiding something.
What you claim is simply not true, Of course they care about other missing children which is why they have raised thousands of pound for the Missing People Charity and also donated thousands of pounds to that charity.
Have you forgotten about the following:
QUOTE from Wales on Line.
Coral Jones and Mrs McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, unveiled a digital billboard at King’s Cross station in London promoting an enhanced Child Rescue Alerts system to inform the public about missing children whose lives are considered at risk.
The scheme will use social media including text messages, email and digital billboards across the UK in addition to traditional broadcast media to issue the alerts when it is launched on Sunday, International Missing Children’s Day.
The scheme, the responsibility of the National Crime Agency (NCA) in partnership with the charity Missing People and the company Groupcall Limited, already has 25,000 people signed up.
End quote.
No doubt you will want to withdraw your claim that ''they just care about Maddie', But I won't hold my breath eh?
Unless you think our motives are in some way criminal ie: knowingly supporting criminals to evade justice I don't really see what is so shockingly awful about people defending the parents of a missing child online against the torrent of suspicion, abuse and vitriol that is heaped upon them on a daily basis. OK, some of us (most of us?) might be considered obsessive if by that you mean we log on here every day to discuss the issue but I'd rather be considered an obsessive supporter of people that I believe to be innocent than an obsessive hate monger of people that I believe are hiding something.
Didn't Jimmy Saville raise millions of pounds for charity?What exactly are you suggesting by that remark? That the McCanns are like Jimmy Saville? That anyone who raises millions of pounds for charity might also be a paedophile? Elton John has raised millions for charity, should we remind people of Jimmy Saville when discussing his efforts too?
Unless you think our motives are in some way criminal ie: knowingly supporting criminals to evade justice I don't really see what is so shockingly awful about people defending the parents of a missing child online against the torrent of suspicion, abuse and vitriol that is heaped upon them on a daily basis. OK, some of us (most of us?) might be considered obsessive if by that you mean we log on here every day to discuss the issue but I'd rather be considered an obsessive supporter of people that I believe to be innocent than an obsessive hate monger of people that I believe are hiding something.
What exactly are you suggesting by that remark? That the McCanns are like Jimmy Saville? That anyone who raises millions of pounds for charity might also be a paedophile? Elton John has raised millions for charity, should we remind people of Jimmy Saville when discussing his efforts too?
I think we've finally got to the truth of the matter. " I'd rather be considered an obsessive supporter of people that I believe to be innocent"What utter crap. I didn't label those with a different opinion "hate mongers," I said that I would rather not be labelled a hate monger. My comment was not trolling thank you.
It all rests on a belief in the innocence of the parents. The innocence of the parents is not a fact, it's a possibility. Others favour a different possibility. Labelling those with a different opinion 'hate mongers' is, in my opinion, trolling. Trolling doesn't become acceptable just because the trolls believe they're right.
I think we've finally got to the truth of the matter. " I'd rather be considered an obsessive supporter of people that I believe to be innocent"
It all rests on a belief in the innocence of the parents. The innocence of the parents is not a fact, it's a possibility. Others favour a different possibility. Labelling those with a different opinion 'hate mongers' is, in my opinion, trolling. Trolling doesn't become acceptable just because the trolls believe they're right.
Of course I'm not suggesting that. What I am pointing out is that just because a person raises money for a charity does not necessarily mean they are good people.So you don't think the McCanns necessarily care about missing children or the welfare and well-being of the families of missing children despite the fact that they have raised thousands of pounds for the charity that supports them? Just because the McCanns raise money for this charity by doing long bike rides and marathons we must not assume that it is because they give a stuff about other missing children? Righty ho then.
In regards the second paragraph, it is also the propaganda they type, day after day.
Also, the attempts to belittle the intelligence and empathy level of 'sceptics' has been consistent throughout. All no doubt, part of the strategy.
Yet the clear hate invariably comes from some of the Mccann supporters.
What strategy would that be
The one in your imagination
We have 20,000 plus sceptics asking for a lie detector test which is unreliable
Based on that it s reasonable to question their intelligence
So you don't think the McCanns necessarily care about missing children or the welfare and well-being of the families of missing children despite the fact that they have raised thousands of pounds for the charity that supports them? Just because the McCanns raise money for this charity by doing long bike rides and marathons we must not assume that it is because they give a stuff about other missing children? Righty ho then.
I think the McCanns receive good publicity for their endeavours.See this is what I would call hate-mongering, of the most sophisticated variety - the suggestion that the McCanns care more about other missing children than their own missing child. Subtle, but if you're the McCanns, still hateful.
It does seem though as if Kate and co do care for other missing people or why would their Facebook page promote the charity so heavily while relegating their daughter's image to one post sometime before Christmas ?
You really don't read other peoples comments.
Do you.
A lie detector test is not going to happen.
As to reliability, that is a matter of debate.
See this is what I would call hate-mongering, of the most sophisticated variety - the suggestion that the McCanns care more about other missing children than their own missing child. Subtle, but if you're the McCanns, still hateful.
See this is what I would call hate-mongering, of the most sophisticated variety - the suggestion that the McCanns care more about other missing children than their own missing child. Subtle, but if you're the McCanns, still hateful.
IMO the McCanns are not promoting anyone other than themselves.
What utter crap. I didn't label those with a different opinion "hate mongers," I said that I would rather not be labelled a hate monger. My comment was not trolling thank you.
You really don't read other peoples comments.
Do you.
A lie detector test is not going to happen.
As to reliability, that is a matter of debate.
We are told they don't read social media and do not have social media accounts.no one believes that
Then again.......
no one believes that
Indeed, there is evidence to show that some members of the Mccann's do.You are not making sens
Thanks to davel, and his reference to Birch.
Now Birch is a member of a certain Cadburys club.
You are not making sens
I have just deleted/modified posts characterising a forum member as a distasteful person on the basis of a single post.
Personal attacks on forum members are not permitted.
Cease and desist.
How do you know what we do and don't care about?The same way that you know what all sceptics are thinking, old stick, I shouldn't wonder.
Who has obstructed the so called 'search' ?
You need to grasp reality.
There is no automatic right that the Mccanns should be believed.
It is also abundantly obvious, no matter your attempted hype, that no trace of Madeleine has been found since she disappeared.
There was an automatic right that Madeleine McCann, a missing little three year old child, should have been looked for by the forces of law and order.
That right was abrogated by the forces of law and order under the leadership of a man who believed her dead.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his 'gut reaction' opinion held sway.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his opinion had precedence over the search for a live child ... for the very simple reason that he had decided she was dead and had died in the holiday aparment on the night of her disappearance.
That there was not a shred of evidence which supported that concerned him not at all.
With nothing to support his opinion Amaral diverted the resources which should have been rightly employed totally on the behalf of the missing child. A tack was taken away from looking for evidence about what had happened to the missing child (what need that as he has so righteously assured all who will listen when he already knew what had happened and that she was dead) again without a shred of supporting evidence.
Madeleine McCann was singularly betrayed by the investigating authorities coordinated by Amaral. Who has spent nearly ten years successfully diverting focus from the incompetence of the investigation led by him.
Pity he hadn't been as good at his day job as he has been at deflecting and celebrating his disastrous deficiencies, which has surely been a master class in its execution.
To the extent that we on a JUSTICE forum are querying why there are those who abhor the injustices which have been perpetrated over a ten year period on a little girl who if she has survived will now be a young person, and her family who have done all possible to find her.
Who were you quoting Alfie? Please provide a cite for the term 'hate monger' if the phrase isn't your own. A cite for those labelling sceptics as 'hate mongers' would be helpful too.Which bit of "I would rather not be labelled a hate-monger" do you not understand? Why do you need any cites for this statement? It's totally bizarre that you are asking me for cites for a statement of opinion.
So please correct me. Hasn't Madeleine's photograph only been promoted once before Christmas while MP has been promoted several times?The child's name is Ben Needham. So what if Madeleine's photograph has only been promoted once on Facebook compared to MP several times? So what? What conclusions would you like us to draw from your observation, and whilst we're at it may I say that your obsession with the OFM FB page is really quite odd IMO - you seem to monitor it very closely, why may I ask when you clear have such contempt for the McCanns, their webmaster, and the page generally?
The official Ben Neddham site while promoting other missing people always had and continues to have Ben at the front and centre of their page.
The child's name is Ben Needham. So what if Madeleine's photograph has only been promoted once on Facebook compared to MP several times? So what? What conclusions would you like us to draw from your observation, and whilst we're at it may I say that your obsession with the OFM FB page is really quite odd IMO - you seem to monitor it very closely, why may I ask when you clear have such contempt for the McCanns, their webmaster, and the page generally?
It is a page set up with the best will in the world to keep Madeleine in the public eye in a positive way. I get a good feeling just from the thought of the kindness people exhibit by their posts.
A kindness campaign has been launched in Princess Diana's memory ... all one has to do is show some kindness and concern for others.(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/01/1c/50/011c505013910543e4c0ce1ae270ce3e.jpg)
Perhaps instead of posting bile about the family of a missing child it might be an opportunity to post_something_ nice_instead.
Who knows what the benefits might be.
You provided the link to Birch a few weeks ago.
Have you forgotten already.
what link was that...cite
She was looked for.
Nothing was found.
The only people to have betrayed Madeleine, and her siblings, were her parents, in not ensuring their safety.
Your rhetoric and propaganda wore thin some time ago.
amaral and the PJ have betrayed maddie by mounting such a poor investigation....IMO
amaral and the PJ have betrayed maddie by mounting such a poor investigation....IMO
Another myth.
Another myth.
Not a myth
An opinion just as valid as any opinion you have
You only have to read amarals book to understand how much he didn't understand and he claims all the pj agreed with him
This is not a Myth.
There was an automatic right that Madeleine McCann, a missing little three year old child, should have been looked for by the forces of law and order.
That right was abrogated by the forces of law and order under the leadership of a man who believed her dead.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his 'gut reaction' opinion held sway.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his opinion had precedence over the search for a live child ... for the very simple reason that he had decided she was dead and had died in the holiday aparment on the night of her disappearance.
That there was not a shred of evidence which supported that concerned him not at all.
With nothing to support his opinion Amaral diverted the resources which should have been rightly employed totally on the behalf of the missing child. A tack was taken away from looking for evidence about what had happened to the missing child (what need that as he has so righteously assured all who will listen when he already knew what had happened and that she was dead) again without a shred of supporting evidence.
Madeleine McCann was singularly betrayed by the investigating authorities coordinated by Amaral. Who has spent nearly ten years successfully diverting focus from the incompetence of the investigation led by him.
Pity he hadn't been as good at his day job as he has been at deflecting and celebrating his disastrous deficiencies, which has surely been a master class in its execution.
To the extent that we on a JUSTICE forum are querying why there are those who abhor the injustices which have been perpetrated over a ten year period on a little girl who if she has survived will now be a young person, and her family who have done all possible to find her.
She was.
Unless you believe the entire Portuguese judiciary is lying and involved in some vast conspiracy to do down a couple of tourists.
Slightly at odds with Davel, here.
Amaral betrayed Madeleine. Also some senior officers who served with him on his watch (and beyond)!
But there was also some sterling (and excellent!) put in by PJ officers in during that enquiry; and by the GNR dog-handlers.
Agreed.
It cannot be denied that some sterling work was carried out by members of all branches of the Portuguese police. The phrase, "Lions led by donkeys" springs to mind.
She was.
Unless you believe the entire Portuguese judiciary is lying and involved in some vast conspiracy to do down a couple of tourists.
There was an automatic right that Madeleine McCann, a missing little three year old child, should have been looked for by the forces of law and order.
That right was abrogated by the forces of law and order under the leadership of a man who believed her dead.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his 'gut reaction' opinion held sway.
Who did everything in his power to ensure that his opinion had precedence over the search for a live child ... for the very simple reason that he had decided she was dead and had died in the holiday aparment on the night of her disappearance.
That there was not a shred of evidence which supported that concerned him not at all.
With nothing to support his opinion Amaral diverted the resources which should have been rightly employed totally on the behalf of the missing child. A tack was taken away from looking for evidence about what had happened to the missing child (what need that as he has so righteously assured all who will listen when he already knew what had happened and that she was dead) again without a shred of supporting evidence.
Madeleine McCann was singularly betrayed by the investigating authorities coordinated by Amaral. Who has spent nearly ten years successfully diverting focus from the incompetence of the investigation led by him.
Pity he hadn't been as good at his day job as he has been at deflecting and celebrating his disastrous deficiencies, which has surely been a master class in its execution.
To the extent that we on a JUSTICE forum are querying why there are those who abhor the injustices which have been perpetrated over a ten year period on a little girl who if she has survived will now be a young person, and her family who have done all possible to find her.
Which bit of "I would rather not be labelled a hate-monger" do you not understand? Why do you need any cites for this statement? It's totally bizarre that you are asking me for cites for a statement of opinion.
You obviously have not read Amaral's book or watched his video. Perhaps you should. In that way you might understand the direction in which he took the investigation as a result of his coordination of Madeleine McCann's case. The man puts it very clearly in print and video for all to mull over.
It's amazing how some still believe that Amaral was able to take charge of the Madeleine investigation and decide on it's direction. Not only did he have to answer to his bosses Encarnacao and Neves, they all had to follow the directions of the public prosecutors, who are the people who actually institute and conduct criminal investigations in Portugal.
I can only assume that it's done so as to suggest that only one maverick policeman suspected the McCanns. In reality his colleagues, the public prosecutor(s) and his PJ bosses were all of the same mind as he was. Neves was adamant also that even though the investigation began to focus mainly on the parents, the other lines of inquiry kept on being investigated.
We only have to look at the evidence on which the McCanns were made arguidos to understand how incompetent they all where
Nah.But they should not be deemed guilty as they were in this case because the police did not understand the evidence
There was no evidence of abduction.
In any investigation, the parents would be suspects and investigated.
...and you know that.
But they should not be deemed guilty as they were in this case because the police did not understand the evidence
We only have to look at the evidence on which the McCanns were made arguidos to understand how incompetent they all where
The child's name is Ben Needham. So what if Madeleine's photograph has only been promoted once on Facebook compared to MP several times? So what? What conclusions would you like us to draw from your observation, and whilst we're at it may I say that your obsession with the OFM FB page is really quite odd IMO - you seem to monitor it very closely, why may I ask when you clear have such contempt for the McCanns, their webmaster, and the page generally?
What I do find odd is that the child whose disappearance the page has been set up to raise awareness of has almost no presence there. In fact if it wasn't for the public mentioning her name in posts you could be forgiven for thinking that it was a Missing People page.
People are made arguido when there's a possibility that they may incriminate themselves when answering police questions.
Some of the questions which Kate McCann declined to answer are quite interesting. They suggest that the PJ had reason to believe that she didn't find it easy caring for three small children, particularly Madeleine.
People are made arguido when there's a possibility that they may incriminate themselves when answering police questions.Was that question relevant to the investigation?
Some of the questions which Kate McCann declined to answer are quite interesting. They suggest that the PJ had reason to believe that she didn't find it easy caring for three small children, particularly Madeleine.
And if Madeleine's face was all over the page you would say that The McCanns don't care about other missing children
Would I ?
Ben Needham's page seems to have struck a happy medium between raising awareness of other missing children however you are never in any doubt that this is Ben's page. The same, unfortunately, can't be said for Madeleine's.
Would I ?What page are we talking about?
Ben Needham's page seems to have struck a happy medium between raising awareness of other missing children however you are never in any doubt that this is Ben's page. The same, unfortunately, can't be said for Madeleine's.
Was that question relevant to the investigation?
Considering the way the investigators were thinking this one might have been;Even if that was true, did she need to answer that question? Answer No.
Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_07-09-07.htm
Even if that was true, did she need to answer that question? Answer No.
What I do find odd is that the child whose disappearance the page has been set up to raise awareness of has almost no presence there. In fact if it wasn't for the public mentioning her name in posts you could be forgiven for thinking that it was a Missing People page.Every time the Webmaster posts the post appears along side a picture of Madeleine. Madeleine's age progression picture heads the page. The page is called "Official Find Madeleine" page. For the umpteenth time you are making something out of nothing for mischevious reasons. Grow up.
Would I ?For the three reasons I have given above you are clearly hopelessly wrong.
Ben Needham's page seems to have struck a happy medium between raising awareness of other missing children however you are never in any doubt that this is Ben's page. The same, unfortunately, can't be said for Madeleine's.
Even if that was true, did she need to answer that question? Answer No.
Every time the Webmaster posts the post appears along side a picture of Madeleine. Madeleine's age progression picture heads the page. The page is called "Official Find Madeleine" page. For the umpteenth time you are making something out of nothing for mischevious reasons. Grow up.
A thumbnail photograph of Madeleine and a static graphic. Is that it ? Where's the appeals ? Even Kate's friend who's running a marathon gets more coverage than the poor child. In fact the webmaster seems to think even her mental health deserves more coverage than raising awareness of Madeleine's disappearance.Why do you care? Gerry threw Madeleine's body in a bin 10 years ago in your opinion.
Why do you care? Gerry threw Madeleine's body in a bin 10 years ago in your opinion.
Do you think in the last 10 years that the McCanns have been guilty of under-publicising their child's disappearance?
For certainly the last five years there seems to have been no active awareness raising of Madeleine's plight by the McCanns apart from a free Facebook page and a virtually static webpage.
Madeleine McCann's case came under review in 2011 and was reopened by Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria.
Her case is open and being worked by the police forces of her home country and the police force of the country from where she disappeared.
It would be entirely inappropriate for anyone to interfere in an open and active case. I rather suspect you are already aware of that ... just another opportunity for criticism.
Are you actually trying to suggest that an ongoing investigation would stop the McCanns raising awareness of Madeleine's plight ? Did it in 2007 ? In fact the excuse made for publicising Madeleine's disappearance when they were told not to by the police was specifically to raise awareness. Are you now saying they were wrong to do that ?For information
For certainly the last five years there seems to have been no active awareness raising of Madeleine's plight by the McCanns apart from a free Facebook page and a virtually static webpage.And that's nothing to do with Operation Grange and the active investigation into her disappearance I suppose? I suggest you voice your complaint to the Webmaster if it upsets you so much, I know you like to give her the benefit of your insight.
For information
01 Processos Vol I Page 31 to 33a
From the PJ
To: The Assistant Prosecutor
Public Ministry
Date: 04-05-2007
Subject: Request for Divulgation by means of the Press
As it is of clear interest to the investigation of the case in reference, I have the honour to ask you to authorise the divulgation of the disappearance of the young girl Madeleine McCann by means of the organs of the press, with the aim of obtaining information leading to her whereabouts.
I enclose a model for divulgation.
With best compliments
The Coordinator of the Investigation.
G. Amaral
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MADELINE.htm#p2p452
There is no requirement for Madeleine McCann's parents to raise awareness or do the work of the police.
The present investigators of the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard have been working Madeleine's case diligently. Her parents are being kept in the loop ...
I don't know what part of the statements by the investigation and Madeleine's parents that there will be no running commentary you do not understand ... but the world has moved on from 2007. You might find it refreshing to join in.
Can anyone remember a moment when the McCanns have made an appeal to the "abductor" or addressed Madeleine directly? I recall one interview when the reporter asked Kate if she would like to say something to her daughter and all Kate could say was: "She knows we love her"! Strange in my eyes.
Kate did ask The Abductor to leave Madeleine in a place of safety.
Kate did ask The Abductor to leave Madeleine in a place of safety.
She did.
And not to harm her.
She did.
And not to harm her.
She did.
And not to harm her.
It was a statement prepared by the police and that was the only time she ever addressed the "abductor". I remember her saying "Devolve a nossa menina". Otherwise, there have never been any spontaneous appeals to return Madeleine or to address her directly to tell her that her parents loved her and were looking for her.
For information
01 Processos Vol I Page 31 to 33a
From the PJ
To: The Assistant Prosecutor
Public Ministry
Date: 04-05-2007
Subject: Request for Divulgation by means of the Press
As it is of clear interest to the investigation of the case in reference, I have the honour to ask you to authorise the divulgation of the disappearance of the young girl Madeleine McCann by means of the organs of the press, with the aim of obtaining information leading to her whereabouts.
I enclose a model for divulgation.
With best compliments
The Coordinator of the Investigation.
G. Amaral
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MADELINE.htm#p2p452
There is no requirement for Madeleine McCann's parents to raise awareness or do the work of the police.
The present investigators of the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard have been working Madeleine's case diligently. Her parents are being kept in the loop ...
I don't know what part of the statements by the investigation and Madeleine's parents that there will be no running commentary you do not understand ... but the world has moved on from 2007. You might find it refreshing to join in.
You are correct there is no technical requirement for Madeleine's parents to raise awareness.....oh apart from the fact they are her parents and, you would think, even after so many years would want to keep Madeleine's disappearance in the public's mind.
Further awareness raising campaigns, such as we have seen with the Needham and Corrie McKeague cases, have run alongside the police investigation. It is not an either or situation as you seem to be suggesting.
It is interesting though that instead of denying there has been a lack of awareness raising on Madeleine's behalf you are attempting to explain it. Now that is interesting.
Are you saying that the disappearance of Madeleine isn't in the public eye?
There is no doubt that Madeleine will know, when she is found, as I believe she will be.
Found where ?
Well well well!. Checking out he date on the above missive it seems Sr Amaral was not dragging the chain afterall. Your cite here would appear to have torpedoed some of your own arguments elsewhere wrt that paticular gentleman and his employers.
It was a statement prepared by the police and that was the only time she ever addressed the "abductor". I remember her saying "Devolve a nossa menina". Otherwise, there have never been any spontaneous appeals to return Madeleine or to address her directly to tell her that her parents loved her and were looking for her.
December 22nd 2007
Mr and Mrs McCann send a public message to their daughter, telling her: "Our only Christmas wish is for you to be back with us again."
Not at all. I'm saying there has been no active awareness raising of her disappearance by her parents in a very long time.Assuming what you say is true, how do you account for this, seeing as for the first few years after her disappearance people like you would mock all the McCanns active awareness raising efforts, accusing them of being shameless self-publicists who were never off the telly or in the papers?
Assuming what you say is true, how do you account for this, seeing as for the first few years after her disappearance people like you would mock all the McCanns active awareness raising efforts, accusing them of being shameless self-publicists who were never off the telly or in the papers?
Also, are you not also of the opinion that all the tabloid stories about Madeleine in recent years (of which there have been hundreds) have their origins in Team McCann - well you can't have it both ways. Either there has been no attempt by the McCanns to raise awareness and they are not behind the tab stories or they have been strenuous in their attempts to harness the power of the media to raise awareness. Which is it?
It was a statement prepared by the police and that was the only time she ever addressed the "abductor". I remember her saying "Devolve a nossa menina". Otherwise, there have never been any spontaneous appeals to return Madeleine or to address her directly to tell her that her parents loved her and were looking for her.
I can't account for their lack of awareness raising in recent years. All very strange.Isn't it always as far as your biased view of the mcCanns is concerned? I do note your efforts in managing to see something odd or strange in everything the McCanns do and don't do, you must be worn out constantly thinking about them and dreaming up new angles to attack them from.
As to the tabloid stories they haven't been about Madeleine per se but almost exclusively about pushing theories that detract from their own culpability.
Isn't it always as far as your biased view of the mcCanns is concerned? I do note your efforts in managing to see something odd or strange in everything the McCanns do and don't do, you must be worn out constantly thinking about them and dreaming up new angles to attack them from.
You do know you've lost the debate when you start to attack a member personally, don't you Alfie?There is no debate to win or lose here, it's just you attacking the McCanns for the sheer fun of it because you have nothing better to do on a Saturday afternoon. Only a loser does that IMO.
There is no debate to win or lose here, it's just you attacking the McCanns for the sheer fun of it because you have nothing better to do on a Saturday afternoon. Only a loser does that IMO.
There is no debate to win or lose here, it's just you attacking the McCanns for the sheer fun of it because you have nothing better to do on a Saturday afternoon. Only a loser does that IMO.
And now name calling ! You really are deploying the whole McCann supporter's arsenal today, aren't you Alfie?Hmm. must be because the parents know Madeleine is dead and so they've dropped the pretence of even bothering anymore and instead are concentrating all their efforts on partying and having fun. Is that what you'd like me to say?
Now instead of attacking me can you please explain why there has been so little awareness raising of Madeleine's plight by the McCanns in recent years?
Hmm. must be because the parents know Madeleine is dead and so they've dropped the pretence of even bothering anymore and instead are concentrating all their efforts on partying and having fun. Is that what you'd like me to say?
If that's what you think go ahead. If not what exactly are your thoughts?I have no thoughts on the matter, I have more interesting things to think about. What the McCanns choose to do or not to do is their concern, not mine, nor do I understand why you feel it important enough to mention on this forum or question me about. Just who is supposed to be obsessed with the McCanns here?
I have no thoughts on the matter, I have more interesting things to think about. What the McCanns choose to do or not to do is their concern, not mine, nor do I understand why you feel it important enough to mention on this forum or question me about. Just who is supposed to be obsessed with the McCanns here?
Don't like my observations then don't answer my posts. It really is that simple Alfie ( haven't we been here before @)(++(* ? )I always answer questions that are put to me (unless by the resident WUM). I thought it was you who didn't enjoy my observations and you who implored me not to reply to your posts? Well tough.
2@ Alfie
Who is the resident WUM then?
I sincerely hope this Forum doesn't have one. But then I ever was a bit of a clot.A bit of introspection going on.
A bit of introspection going on.
No. Just Crass. There is something to be said for Crass.Never liked Crass, a bit too shouty and anarchic for my tastes.
Never liked Crass, a bit too shouty and anarchic for my tastes.
Who, me? I thought it just meant Clot. But I don't think I have ever been shouty or anarchic.
Must try harder.
You should try it Eleanor. Very cathartic ?{)(**
Pour vous, pert être, mais par pour mois. And you wouldn't like it if I was.
French and Hungarian, impressive.
Pour vous, pert être, mais par pour mois. And you wouldn't like it if I was.
Pour vous, peut-être, mais pas pour moi.
No. Just Crass. There is something to be said for Crass.Crass is not a word I use. I don't really understand it, sorry.
Crass is not a word I use. I don't really understand it, sorry.
Looking up the dictionary definition I don't understand why anyone would admit to being crass.
https://www.google.co.nz/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw&gws_rd=ssl#hl=en&q=crass+meaning&*
"crass
kras/Submit
adjective
showing no intelligence or sensitivity.
"the crass assumptions that men make about women"
synonyms: stupid, insensitive, blundering, dense, thick, vacuous, mindless, witless, doltish, oafish, boorish, asinine, bovine, coarse, gross;..."
Or a clot;We do call people a "silly clot" in NZ.
British , Slang
a stupid or silly person; fool
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/clot
...and so all my posts got pulled but this page which has nothing to do with the thread title stays ? hmm yeah.It must have been what you wrote.
It must have been what you wrote.
Maybe too close to the bones of this farce. Hero parents searcing for child. Who has come to no harm at all.A minute in the bath on a baby seat and half an hour asleep in bed maybe the acceptable standard. Who knows? Parents have to have a life too.
The rules are all off topic posts will be deleted.. why is this page still here with a mods ramblings- who insists we all stay on thread title. AND that is why this post is befitting of the title of this thread. Why are people obsessed with supporting these parents who let their daughter be 'abducted'.
...and so all my posts got pulled but this page which has nothing to do with the thread title stays ? hmm yeah.
It's a function of the volume of Druid Fluid that flows down the inlet pipe.*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£
*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£I think the fact is that if some other third party had not come into the apartment and mucked around with Madeleine, in particular, no harm would have eventuated.
Indeed! Alice.
Rob I know you like to joke around... but seriously? leaving your child alone in an appartment to be 'abducted' is ok with you? ... oh what ever.
I think the fact is that if some other third party had not come into the apartment and mucked around with Madeleine, in particular, no harm would have eventuated.
I think the fact is that if some other third party had not come into the apartment and mucked around with Madeleine, in particular, no harm would have eventuated.
So, accidents never happen to children left alone, only abductors?If there had just been an accident she would have been in the house.
If there had just been an accident she would have been in the house.
Accidents can happen inside and outside Rob.Secondary transfer of what?
Never forget secondary transfer either.