Katie Hopkins says Sun banned her from writing about Madeleine McCann!

[Mr Gray]

Hopkins is critical of the McCanns childcare
But she thinks Maddie was abducted
Another vote for abduction

[Alfie]

And bloggers shining a light on the darker corners of this case ?

What about them? 

[faithlilly]

What about them?

Do you find them credible ?

[Alfie]

Do you find them credible ?

you'll have to be a bit more specific than that.  Some have obviously put in a huge amount of work and come at this case with an objective, open mind (Heri for example), some are clearly biased and let their unbridled hatred get in the way, and so their credibility is often somewhat compromised (Stud Muffin for example).

[mercury]

Hatred...a muchbandied emotive term, so pathetic as well
How can anyone personally hate anyone they dont know...how can anyone call lapse childcare criticism hatred
Some people need to have a word with themselves and fine tune their arguments if they want to be taken seriously

Eta

And the same goes to the ones that spout nonsensically "youre jealous" of the mccanns

[G-Unit]

Hatred...a muchbandied emotive term, so pathetic as well
How can anyone personally hate anyone they dont know...how can anyone call lapse childcare criticism hatred
Some people need to have a word with themselves and fine tune their arguments if they want to be taken seriously

Eta

And the same goes to the ones that spout nonsensically "youre jealous" of the mccanns

I agree. I have seen instant dislike and character attacks on here of anyone who dares to criticise or question the McCanns. That happens whether the person is in the public eye or just an anonymous poster.

It serves no purpose either. No-one cares what McCann supporters think of Amaral, Katie Hopkins, Katie Price et al. When other posters are attacked it often seems to happen in an attempt to silence or deflect debates, or because the supporter has run out of arguments. It's very transparent.

[faithlilly]

you'll have to be a bit more specific than that.  Some have obviously put in a huge amount of work and come at this case with an objective, open mind (Heri for example), some are clearly biased and let their unbridled hatred get in the way, and so their credibility is often somewhat compromised (Stud Muffin for example).

So basically anyone who agrees with you is okay. Have I got that right ?

[mercury]

I agree. I have seen instant dislike and character attacks on here of anyone who dares to criticise or question the McCanns. That happens whether the person is in the public eye or just an anonymous poster.

It serves no purpose either. No-one cares what McCann supporters think of Amaral, Katie Hopkins, Katie Price et al. When other posters are attacked it often seems to happen in an attempt to silence or deflect debates, or because the supporter has run out of arguments. It's very transparent.

Well said. I also notice that a search is done for info to discredit the person rather than focus on the issue

As if if anyone says something wrong once it makes everythng they say later equally wrong, totally illogical

[John]

The topic is Katie Hopkins and not Tannerman!  TY

[sadie]

The topic is Katie Hopkins and not Tannerman!  TY

Well who cares about Katie Hopkins ?

I always liked the Osbornes but Sharon obviously doesn't know the facts.

[mercury]

Well who cares about Katie Hopkins ?

I always liked the Osbornes but Sharon obviously doesn't know the facts.

She commented on the leaving toddlers alone there are no other facts

And she was absolutely right to say its insane to do so, no normal parents do this  with their toddlers end of

[G-Unit]

Well who cares about Katie Hopkins ?

I always liked the Osbornes but Sharon obviously doesn't know the facts.

That's a typical non reply. No attempt whatsoever to reply to what the women said. Also incorrect as both of them clearly do know the facts.

[Alfie]

So basically anyone who agrees with you is okay. Have I got that right ?

I thought the question was about credibility, not about whether individuals are OK or not.  I happen to think the argument that the McCanns dunnit cannot be credibly explained.  No one has successfully argued completely objectively how, why, when or where in any blog I have ever read.  That said everyone is entitled to hold an opinion, and I would argue that Tim Fenton's  opinion is just as credible and valid as Hopkins' despite the fact that he is neither paid for his opinions nor a C-list celebrity.

[Benice]

That's a typical non reply. No attempt whatsoever to reply to what the women said. Also incorrect as both of them clearly do know the facts.

Sharon Osbourne clearly believes that Madeleine was abducted.

This is an excerpt from what she said during an US show called The Talk - (on Youtube) explaining why she made those comments.
Quote

.............. a case I cited to educate young girls who were not looking at the news when Maddie was taken - cos they were too young..............................
End quote

[slartibartfast]

Sharon Osbourne clearly believes that Madeleine was abducted.

This is an excerpt from what she said during an US show called The Talk - (on Youtube) explaining why she made those comments.
Quote

.............. a case I cited to educate young girls who were not looking at the news when Maddie was taken - cos they were too young..............................
End quote

Immaterial, the point being that she was attacked for criticising the McCanns.