The 'Hate' Question.

[faithlilly]

Sad and irrational response

But I'm afraid woefully predictable Redblossom 

[Redblossom]

Sad and irrational response

But I'm afraid woefully predictable Redblossom 

Yes, sadly as especially the blanket black balling of sceptics is ginormous compared with the almost non existant blackballing of *believers* for wont of a better word

Personally I have challenged some rubbish on a certain forum or two, yea, forums from both camps, and got jumped on, derided, bullied and banned, you cant win for trying sometimes, just glad this forum exists where neither camps have any control, blessing really especially for on off fence sitters

Twitter is a whole different kettle of fish, irrelevant here IMO

[AnneGuedes]

The more I think of it, the more strikes me that David's child is the one who appeared just to disappear.

[Redblossom]

no I am not, I initially joined for a few weeks and deleted my membership, wasnt for me, I tried to correct some rubbish but more rubbish tended to come out, still sad and irrational of you  though, to base your whole guilt tripping argument about comments made against parents of a missing child is misguided, not all parents of mising children are automatically innocent, and as we know, the case is COLD, you might think the Mccanns are cleared, many don't, and  if people think the parents might be involved thats their prerogative to comment, whether its bitchy or not, the mccanns have no right to social deference of any kind from anyone, the right to be believes by all people and you  cant control social media, no one can, and you cant hold anyone reaponsible either  whether you like it or not,not for you to police them and then lump the worst comments of a few as representative of ALL sceptics you have little argument here

[Mrs. B]

The more I think of it, the more strikes me that David's child is the one who appeared just to disappear.

I think that whoever reads a passage in the bible is allowed to put their own emotional interpretation of that it means to THEM & what comfort it gives THEM. It's a private matter & meaningless to anyone else.

[AnneGuedes]

The more I think of it, the more strikes me that David's child is the one who appeared just to disappear.

I think that whoever reads a passage in the bible is allowed to put their own emotional interpretation of that it means to THEM & what comfort it gives THEM. It's a private matter & meaningless to anyone else.

Lol about "emotions", Mrs B. Ite missa est !

[Redblossom]

Sad and irrational response

But I'm afraid woefully predictable Redblossom 

Yes, sadly as especially the blanket black balling of sceptics is ginormous compared with the almost non existant blackballing of *believers* for wont of a better word

Personally I have challenged some rubbish on a certain forum or two, yea, forums from both camps, and got jumped on, derided, bullied and banned, you cant win for trying sometimes, just glad this forum exists where neither camps have any control, blessing really especially for on off fence sitters

Twitter is a whole different kettle of fish, irrelevant here IMO

Twitter may be irrelevant as far as your concerned but if you are the kids of one of the McCanns' friends and you google daddy's name, the first link that pops up is to someone on twitter impersonating him and accusing him of child sex abuse.  The person behind that twitter account also helps to run the Controversy Facebook page and recruiting new members.

If parents are going to let their young kids go online they have a reaponaibility for them, especially if they havebeen involved in a high profile case, and in this case in such an unfortunate way, in this case, Mr Payne should do something about it, I find it hardto believe he doesnt know about it, he has the option to get twitter to ban that ID as it impersonates his name and picture, get brit police involved and also the ability to sue,I agree that user name and tweets are decrepit as its all based on a friends interpretation of gestures and half heard conversations denoting in her mind paedophilia involving 2 year olds

[Redblossom]

no I am not, I initially joined for a few weeks and deleted my membership, wasnt for me, I tried to correct some rubbish but more rubbish tended to come out, still sad and irrational of you  though, to base your whole guilt tripping argument about comments made against parents of a missing child is misguided, not all parents of mising children are automatically innocent, and as we know, the case is COLD, you might think the Mccanns are cleared, many don't, and  if people think the parents might be involved thats their prerogative to comment, whether its bitchy or nof, you cant control social media, no one can, and you cant hold anyone reaponsible eithedm whether you like it or not,not for you to police them and then lump the worst comments of a few as representative of ALL sceptics you have little argument here

I'm not attempting to control social media but if I see people coming together online to act hatefully about innocent people then I am well within my rights to comment on what I see and for the most part I see a bunch of h.....s.  It's like the BNP isn't it?  Not everyone who votes for them is a racist necessarily but you'd still be right to describe the BNP and its leading members as a racist party led by racists.

thats better and of course youre within youre rights, what is not your right is blackballing everyone who is somewhere as being the same as the worst and castigating them because they havent caused a riot against certain comments, so no, you cant control social media or the internet and you cant pontificate on what people must or should do thats the popes job

[AnneGuedes]

Sad and irrational response

But I'm afraid woefully predictable Redblossom 

Yes, sadly as especially the blanket black balling of sceptics is ginormous compared with the almost non existant blackballing of *believers* for wont of a better word

Personally I have challenged some rubbish on a certain forum or two, yea, forums from both camps, and got jumped on, derided, bullied and banned, you cant win for trying sometimes, just glad this forum exists where neither camps have any control, blessing really especially for on off fence sitters

Twitter is a whole different kettle of fish, irrelevant here IMO

Twitter may be irrelevant as far as your concerned but if you are the kids of one of the McCanns' friends and you google daddy's name, the first link that pops up is to someone on twitter impersonating him and accusing him of child sex abuse.  The person behind that twitter account also helps to run the Controversy Facebook page and recruiting new members.

If parents are going to let their young kids go online they have a reaponaibility for them, especially if they havebeen involved in a high profile case, and in this case in such an unfortunate way, in this case, Mr Payne should do something about it, I find it hardto believe he doesnt know about it, he has the option to get twitter to ban that ID as it impersonates his name and picture, get brit police involved and also the ability to sue,I agree that user name and tweets are decrepit as its all based on a friends interpretation of gestures and half heard conversations denoting in her mind paedophilia involving 2 year olds

This is really a terrible issue. The trouble is that this testimony was made by 2 doctors, not uncultured people, acquaintances of the McCanns (he obviously following her) and that it cast a doubt not only on DP but on GMC. Once said and published, I think the better would be to face it. I'm horrified thinking that kids sooner or later will discover this on the web.

[ferryman]

.... and that it cast a doubt not only on DP but on GMC.

I beg to differ.

Mr Gaspar's statement reads (almost) like a favourable character reference.

Mrs Gaspar appears to have misconstrued some gesture that patently had nothing to do with any child (let alone Madeleine).


And it all happened in another country (very far away) ...

[Redblossom]

Anne it was only Mrs K Gaspar who imagined certain things, her husband just saw DP making  sexual gestures like she did
Mrs  K blended those gestures with the fact she thought he and Gm were talking about Madeleine in that way which I personally found hard to believe if she was sitting in between them or even if she wasnt

This is just MO but I think once Madeleine went missing and she found out he was part of the group, she made mental leaps from her fears and imaginings frombefore when she was on holiday with him and what had happened and felt she  had to report her feelings, nothing wrong with that, the Pj shouldnt have put it in the released files though

[faithlilly]

.... and that it cast a doubt not only on DP but on GMC.

I beg to differ.

Mr Gaspar's statement reads (almost) like a favourable character reference.

Mrs Gaspar appears to have misconstrued some gesture that patently had nothing to do with any child (let alone Madeleine).


And it all happened in another country (very far away) ...

That is, by far, the most ridiculous comment I've ever seen you post, and I've seen you post a few.

A character reference ? In what way ?
It happened far away. That is relevant why ?

[faithlilly]

.... and that it cast a doubt not only on DP but on GMC.

I beg to differ.

Mr Gaspar's statement reads (almost) like a favourable character reference.

Mrs Gaspar appears to have misconstrued some gesture that patently had nothing to do with any child (let alone Madeleine).


And it all happened in another country (very far away) ...

Yes, Arul Gaspar generally had nothing but positive things to say about DrP in his statement.

And Harold Shipman was adored by many of his patients. Your point ?

[Mrs. B]

Who is being compared to Harold Shipman exactly? Arul Gaspar or David Payne?

[Redblossom]

.... and that it cast a doubt not only on DP but on GMC.

I beg to differ.

Mr Gaspar's statement reads (almost) like a favourable character reference.

Mrs Gaspar appears to have misconstrued some gesture that patently had nothing to do with any child (let alone Madeleine).


And it all happened in another country (very far away) ...

That is, by far, the most ridiculous comment I've ever seen you post, and I've seen you post a few.

A character reference ? In what way ?
It happened far away. That is relevant why ?

its ferryman talk, a character reference is sticking your finger  in and out of your mouth LOL