Is there any context in which hateful and/or abusive tweets about the McCanns are acceptable?

[Robittybob1]

Your opinions aren’t always based on bias and antipathy, sometimes there’s ignorance as well.

We need a cite for that.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Your opinions aren’t always based on bias and antipathy, sometimes there’s ignorance as well.

Bored, but not bored enough to come back for one last put down before bedtime I see.  In my opinion ther is no context in which hateful or abusive tweets are acceptable EXCEPT when reproducing them as an example of hateful abuse.  If you disagree kindly explain why and then others can decide just who displays more bias, antipathy and ignorance.

[Vertigo Swirl]

We need a cite for that.

No cite needed.  I think though that the post was a good example of projection

Projection

1) An unconscious self-defence mechanism characterised by a person unconsciously attributing their own issues onto someone or something else as a form of delusion and denial.

[Robittybob1]

No cite needed.  I think though that the post was a good example of projection

Projection

1) An unconscious self-defence mechanism characterised by a person unconsciously attributing their own issues onto someone or something else as a form of delusion and denial.

I'd have to think about that one.

[Sunny]

Bored, but not bored enough to come back for one last put down before bedtime I see.  In my opinion ther is no context in which hateful or abusive tweets are acceptable EXCEPT when reproducing them as an example of hateful abuse.  If you disagree kindly explain why and then others can decide just who displays more bias, antipathy and ignorance.

hateful
arousing, deserving of, or filled with hatred.
"that hateful arrogant woman"
informal
very unpleasant.
"a hateful dress"

Which definition of hateful were you referring to in the OP Vertigo Swirl.

[faithlilly]

Bored, but not bored enough to come back for one last put down before bedtime I see.  In my opinion ther is no context in which hateful or abusive tweets are acceptable EXCEPT when reproducing them as an example of hateful abuse.  If you disagree kindly explain why and then others can decide just who displays more bias, antipathy and ignorance.

I think you are going rather off track. Weren’t we debating how many of the GBP like a good mystery and whether this has any relevance to overall interest in the McCanns fate ?

[Alice Purjorick]

Quite. An opinion based on nothing but the opinion holder’s bias and antipathy.   Many thanks.

My pleasure old son. I am content that  you agree because it does not need much in the way of mental powers to deduce that the only known fact in this case is that a little girl vanished into thin air on 3rd May 2007.
All the rest is as you say "An opinion based on nothing but the opinion holder’s bias and antipathy".

[Brietta]

My pleasure old son. I am content that  you agree because it does not need much in the way of mental powers to deduce that the only known fact in this case is that a little girl vanished into thin air on 3rd May 2007.
All the rest is as you say "An opinion based on nothing but the opinion holder’s bias and antipathy".

In my opinion you are entirely wrong in that because solid evidence in the form of forensics does exist as discussed on a thread on the forum some time ago.
In my opinion misinterpretation and mistaken portrayal of that evidence in book and video has added to the vituperation directed at the McCann family which is what this thread is all about.

So how about sticking to the topic of this thread instead of in my opinion floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee ... which I always thought an inappropriate analogy as bees only get one bite at the cherry.

[Vertigo Swirl]

My pleasure old son. I am content that  you agree because it does not need much in the way of mental powers to deduce that the only known fact in this case is that a little girl vanished into thin air on 3rd May 2007.
All the rest is as you say "An opinion based on nothing but the opinion holder’s bias and antipathy".

I am not that old and I am not your or anyone else’s son.  Kindly desist from your ironic little terms of endearment when addressing me, thanks.  As for the rest of your post, it’s nonsense IMO, and that’s based on my informed opinion. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think you are going rather off track. Weren’t we debating how many of the GBP like a good mystery and whether this has any relevance to overall interest in the McCanns fate ?

Were we?  Oh yes you wanted precise figures for the number of people who enjoy a mystery.  Very on track I’m sure.  If you want to believe that the GBP is bored of the McCanns and the mystery of what happened to their daughter then that’s your prerogative and your unsubstantiated opinion.  May as well leave it there because it’s an argument neither of us can win.  Meanwhile I look forward to being one of only a handful of people tuning in to the 8 part Netflix documentary when it eventually gets shown. 

[faithlilly]

Were we?  Oh yes you wanted precise figures for the number of people who enjoy a mystery.  Very on track I’m sure.  If you want to believe that the GBP is bored of the McCanns and the mystery of what happened to their daughter then that’s your prerogative and your unsubstantiated opinion.  May as well leave it there because it’s an argument neither of us can win.  Meanwhile I look forward to being one of only a handful of people tuning in to the 8 part Netflix documentary when it eventually gets shown.

I think you are conflating the interest in the case as a whole and the well-being of the McCanns. I think people are interested in the mystery, less so about the treatment of the McCanns at the hands of the public.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think you are conflating the interest in the case as a whole and the well-being of the McCanns. I think people are interested in the mystery, less so about the treatment of the McCanns at the hands of the public.

No, I’m not the confused one here.  I asked you why your boredom threshold with the McCanns (not what happened to Madeleine) had not been reached yet and you replied that you were a sucker for a mystery.    You did not say people’s boredom threshold with the well-being of the McCanns had been breached.  But here’s a surprise for you - I actually agree with you, I think though cannot prove it that on the whole the GBP are probably heartily sick of the sight of them, as they seem to be with most people in the public eye, if the comments online about most famous people are anything to go by.  The GBP love to moan and scorn.

[faithlilly]

No, I’m not the confused one here.  I asked you why your boredom threshold with the McCanns (not what happened to Madeleine) had not been reached yet and you replied that you were a sucker for a mystery.    You did not say people’s boredom threshold with the well-being of the McCanns had been breached.  But here’s a surprise for you - I actually agree with you, I think though cannot prove it that on the whole the GBP are probably heartily sick of the sight of them, as they seem to be with most people in the public eye, if the comments online about most famous people are anything to go by.  The GBP love to moan and scorn.

They are also very astute at sniffing out chancers when they see them.

[Vertigo Swirl]

They are also very astute at sniffing out chancers when they see them.

What do you mean by that?

[Alice Purjorick]

In my opinion you are entirely wrong in that because solid evidence in the form of forensics does exist as discussed on a thread on the forum some time ago.
In my opinion misinterpretation and mistaken portrayal of that evidence in book and video has added to the vituperation directed at the McCann family which is what this thread is all about.

So how about sticking to the topic of this thread instead of in my opinion floating like a butterfly and stinging like a bee ... which I always thought an inappropriate analogy as bees only get one bite at the cherry.

Not so.
Forensic reports are indirect evidence, sometimes they can even be classified as hearsay. As such they are subject to scrutiny and evaluation by the court.