« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 143   Go Down

Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 270448 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1080 on: February 08, 2017, 09:52:05 AM »
Quote from: Alfie on February 08, 2017, 09:13:24 AM
We're just not as "into" it all as the McCann critics are (and we don't have a little army of Portuguese English speakers with a lot of time of their hands  @)(++(* )

Some like to debate using opinion, others like to use facts.
Logged
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1081 on: February 08, 2017, 10:12:32 AM »

Still perplexed why apparently none of the MSM is running with the judgement   &%+((£
Logged
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1082 on: February 08, 2017, 10:16:34 AM »
Quote from: G-Unit on February 08, 2017, 09:52:05 AM
Some like to debate using opinion, others like to use facts.
What has that got to do with what I posted?
Logged

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1083 on: February 08, 2017, 10:17:16 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:12:32 AM
Still perplexed why apparently none of the MSM is running with the judgement   &%+((£
Maybe the McCanns have wielded their almighty power over the press to shut them up?   &%+((£
Logged

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1084 on: February 08, 2017, 10:17:50 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:12:32 AM
Still perplexed why apparently none of the MSM is running with the judgement   &%+((£

That is crystal clear.

On the surface at least, they backed the Mccann's 100%.

However, when the full translation becomes available as to what the Portuguese Supreme Court said last week...
Logged

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1085 on: February 08, 2017, 10:19:33 AM »
Quote from: stephen25000 on February 08, 2017, 10:17:50 AM
That is crystal clear.

On the surface at least, they backed the Mccann's 100%.

However, when the full translation becomes available as to what the Portuguese Supreme Court said last week...

i dont believe anything  really that MSM     report   i would  believe portugese  reporters more then  the uk  about this case   the uk media are too biased imo
Logged

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1086 on: February 08, 2017, 10:23:31 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:12:32 AM
Still perplexed why apparently none of the MSM is running with the judgement   &%+((£

Early days. Maybe a special Sunday edition for us  to look forward to   ?{)(**
Logged
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1087 on: February 08, 2017, 10:24:06 AM »
Quote from: carlymichelle on February 08, 2017, 10:19:33 AM
i dont believe anything  really that MSM     report   i would  believe portugese  reporters more then  the uk  about this case   the uk media are too biased imo

Most, with the exception of the odd journalist who places their head above the parapet , have tied the Mccann line.
Logged

Offline Brietta

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1088 on: February 08, 2017, 10:25:51 AM »
Quote from: stephen25000 on February 08, 2017, 10:17:50 AM
That is crystal clear.

On the surface at least, they backed the Mccann's 100%.

However, when the full translation becomes available as to what the Portuguese Supreme Court said last week...

              The Portuguese press?   &%&£(+
Logged
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1089 on: February 08, 2017, 10:26:12 AM »
Quote from: G-Unit on February 08, 2017, 09:52:05 AM
Some like to debate using opinion, others like to use facts.
Which bracket do you put yourself in btw?  As it seems to me a lot of your posts in support of your suspicions are wholly opinion based.  The McCanns behaved "oddly", a would-be abductor "wouldn't behave in that way", a caring mother "would do this" etc etc etc. 
Logged

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1090 on: February 08, 2017, 10:27:52 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:25:51 AM
              The Portuguese press?   &%&£(+

I was talking about the UK press.
Logged

Offline Brietta

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1091 on: February 08, 2017, 10:33:36 AM »
Quote from: stephen25000 on February 08, 2017, 10:27:52 AM
I was talking about the UK press.

The mainstream Portuguese press are not covering the judgement as yet ... I find that extraordinary.
Logged
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1092 on: February 08, 2017, 10:38:17 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:12:32 AM
Still perplexed why apparently none of the MSM is running with the judgement   &%+((£

don.t worry about it Brietta....it will come ...

when the judgement .is shown ..some will have a lot more to worry about than MSM
Logged
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1093 on: February 08, 2017, 10:40:01 AM »
Quote from: Alfie on February 08, 2017, 10:17:16 AM
Maybe the McCanns have wielded their almighty power over the press to shut them up?   &%+((£


wishful thinking ...on your part .....
Logged
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Montclair

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #1094 on: February 08, 2017, 10:46:48 AM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 08, 2017, 10:33:36 AM
The mainstream Portuguese press are not covering the judgement as yet ... I find that extraordinary.

The decision was reported in all of the newspapers in Portugal. If you are not in Portugal how would you know.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 71 72 [73] 74 75 ... 143   Go Up
« previous next »