So what now, post Supreme Court decisions?

[stephen25000]

No I am female. Masons are only for men.  The masons go back to biblical times when   Wise King Solomon was on the throne. He wanted good quality stone masons, who were held in high esteem, and to honour them he let them become free men- not slaves... The roman catholic church wanted to have a heirerarchy with them at the head, and the masons stood firm and said no-  we are free -as in free.

The SC have not changed their mind have they?  hmmm

Sorry, you're wrong on that.

https://www.owf.org.uk/

[Mr Gray]

Research dave, research.

The operating code of Masons.

i know it....do you really believe the masons are protecting the mccanns

[stephen25000]

i know it....do you really believe the masons are protecting the mccanns

The operating code dave.

[Alfie]

Can we all agree (apart from SIL and Stephen) that the McCanns are not "off-limits"?

[stephen25000]

Can we all agree (apart from SIL and Stephen) that the McCanns are not "off-limits"?

So when Alf  did OG interview the mccanns and Co. ?

They have never once said they have.

[Alfie]

So when Alf  did OG interview the mccanns and Co. ?

They have never once said they have.

I have no idea but I don't think either party was legally bound to inform the public of the date or content of such an interview assuming it took place.  It would be bloody odd for a police force that we know is in regular contact with the McCanns and keeps them updated on progress to not once ask them anything about the events on and leading up to 3rd May 2007.  And in the unlikely event that the Met never got round to interviewing the McCanns does that mean they are "off limits" even if new incriminating evidence against them should surface?

[stephen25000]

I have no idea but I don't think either party was legally bound to inform the public of the date or content of such an interview assuming it took place.  It would be bloody odd for a police force that we know is in regular contact with the McCanns and keeps them updated on progress to not once ask them anything about the events on and leading up to 3rd May 2007.  And in the unlikely event that the Met never got round to interviewing the McCanns does that mean they are "off limits" even if new incriminating evidence against them should surface?

There is the key.

Keeping in regular contact with the McCann's.

Yet the crime, if one occurred in the apartment, has not been determined. ......................

[ferryman]

Can we all agree (apart from SIL and Stephen) that the McCanns are not "off-limits"?

I'm not clear what is meant by "off-limits"?

[faithlilly]

It is not a fallacy, it is true. Your friend  maybe both but he is  going against the  church ruling which states that freemasonry is incompatible with the Catholic faith, reiterated in 1983.
I'd imagine that there are some Catholics in the masons but whether this was the case with G MCcann I have no idea but find the concept of them being protected quite laughable.

My friend is a catholic and a mason. I have no idea how good a catholic he is. I, however, agree with you that the McCanns are not being protected.

[Mr Gray]

So when Alf  did OG interview the mccanns and Co. ?

They have never once said they have.

the mccanns are the last known people to see maddie. the met would have asked them to tell them what happened on the last day. It would be unthinkable that the met would not interview the mccanns

[Alfie]

I'm not clear what is meant by "off-limits"?

It was SIL who introduced the phrase claiming it is in the remit.  It means the Met won't touch the McCanns with a bargepole, even in the event of  the discovery of evidence against them.  When asked SIL won't say why the McCanns are so protected and will simply say "remit".
 It's all nonsense of course.

[ShiningInLuz]

the mccanns are the last known people to see maddie. the met would have asked them to tell them what happened on the last day. It would be unthinkable that the met would not interview the mccanns

Pure speculation.  Keywords - would, would be unthinkable.  Says it all.

[ShiningInLuz]

It was SIL who introduced the phrase claiming it is in the remit.  It means the Met won't touch the McCanns with a bargepole, even in the event of  the discovery of evidence against them.  When asked SIL won't say why the McCanns are so protected and will simply say "remit".
 It's all nonsense of course.

I never said the term off limits appears within the remit.  I said the remit means the McCanns are off limits, and it does.

I am not going to speculate why the remit is constructed to put the McCanns off limits.  The important point is that it is so constructed.

[Mr Gray]

I never said the term off limits appears within the remit.  I said the remit means the McCanns are off limits, and it does.

I am not going to speculate why the remit is constructed to put the McCanns off limits.  The important point is that it is so constructed.

no it isnt...you are still posting your opinion as fact....it is merely your INTEPRETATION...thats all...not fact

[Alfie]

I never said the term off limits appears within the remit.  I said the remit means the McCanns are off limits, and it does.

I am not going to speculate why the remit is constructed to put the McCanns off limits.  The important point is that it is so constructed.

As with most conspiracy theorists you're seeing only what you want to see and when challenged to come up with any sort of logical or plausible reason to support your conspiracy theory you demur.