KM's Paperback (PB)

[G-Unit]

I read a fair few reviews of Kate’s book by professional reviewers in papers and magazines.  They were all mostly favourable and not one expressed faux outrage over sceptics’ favourite tropes such as “torn genitals” or the sexual problems.   What McCann sceptics have done is focus on any part of the book they can that they think, taken out of context, will whip up anger, disgust and hatred which is why these tropes are so enduring and get trotted out with yawnsome regularity.  It is tiresome and incredibly childish to do so, IMO.

Are reviewers always right then?

[Venturi Swirl]

Are reviewers always right then?

The fact that not one of them raised objections to the use of the phrase “torn genitals” or lamented the inclusion of a short paragraph on Kate’s sexual problems after Madeleine’s disappearance certainly does help to put things into perspective IMO.  After all, no one is more vicious about people in the news than the world’s media, especially the tabs, and the fact that not one of them world wide made a big deal about it (apart from the Sun which merely used a salacious headline to sell papers, not to criticise) speaks volumes IMO.

ETA: are nasty, childish anonymous commentators online always right?

[G-Unit]

The fact that not one of them raised objections to the use of the phrase “torn genitals” or lamented the inclusion of a short paragraph on Kate’s sexual problems after Madeleine’s disappearance certainly does help to put things into perspective IMO.  After all, no one is more vicious about people in the news than the world’s media, especially the tabs, and the fact that not one of them world wide made a big deal about it (apart from the Sun which merely used a salacious headline to sell papers, not to criticise) speaks volumes IMO.

ETA: are nasty, childish anonymous commentators online always right?

Whether or not a book is good is a matter of opinion, whether it's the opinion of someone being paid for their opinion or not. Kate McCann's book didn't move me at all, and it was nothing to do with me being nasty, childish or anonymous.

[Venturi Swirl]

Whether or not a book is good is a matter of opinion, whether it's the opinion of someone being paid for their opinion or not. Kate McCann's book didn't move me at all, and it was nothing to do with me being nasty, childish or anonymous.

It moved lots of people as the majority of reviews on Amazon bear testimony to, probably those who didn't come to the book with their minds already made up that Kate and Gerry were rather unpleasant individuals who deserved everything coming to them.  IMO.  The fact that you could read the book and not feel anything for Kate in that situation reveals more about you than it does about her tbh. 

[Mr Gray]

It moved lots of people as the majority of reviews on Amazon bear testimony to, probably those who didn't come to the book with their minds already made up that Kate and Gerry were rather unpleasant individuals who deserved everything coming to them.  IMO.  The fact that you could read the book and not feel anything for Kate in that situation reveals more about you than it does about her tbh.

it seems some posters here can read about 30 + people dying in a lorry and not be moved...so no surprise they were not moved by kates book

[Venturi Swirl]

it seems some posters here can read about 30 + people dying in a lorry and not be moved...so no surprise they were not moved by kates book

Well quite.  It's down to a basic lack of humanity, imo. 
Cue the chirrups of "where was the McCanns humanity when Maddie was crying" - yawn. 

[G-Unit]

It moved lots of people as the majority of reviews on Amazon bear testimony to, probably those who didn't come to the book with their minds already made up that Kate and Gerry were rather unpleasant individuals who deserved everything coming to them.  IMO.  The fact that you could read the book and not feel anything for Kate in that situation reveals more about you than it does about her tbh.

The obvious answer to that is that those people also approached the book with their minds already made up. Whatever happened to Madeleine McCann her parents lost a child, but the heartbreak didn't come through to me although I was open to it.

My reaction was not in my control, it was in Kate McCann's.

[Venturi Swirl]

The obvious answer to that is that those people also approached the book with their minds already made up. Whatever happened to Madeleine McCann her parents lost a child, but the heartbreak didn't come through to me although I was open to it.

My reaction was not in my control, it was in Kate McCann's.

If the heartbreak did come through to me and to many others including many professional book reviewers, then the fact that it did not come through to you is surely not Kate's fault!  The only way IMO you could fail to be moved by it is if you were convinced Kate was lying throughout and knows where her child's body is. 

[Venturi Swirl]

"There's not much hard new information in Madeleine, Kate McCann's book about her daughter. But what is new is Kate's powerful and moving description of the horror she has been through, the worst nightmare that any parent can imagine. In the book she describes minute by minute that awful night when ordinary family life for her ended and the nightmare she is still living every day began".
https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/review-madeleine-by-kate-mccann-26804033.html

I suppose because this person was "paid for their opinion" you think that means they had to review the book favourably?  That obviously is completely illogical as I'm sure you would realise if you actually thought about it carefully.

[Venturi Swirl]

So, this person wasn't paid for their review
"I am half way through the Madeleine McCann book written by her mother and It filled me with so many emotions whilst reading it, I really feel for their whole family. I pray to God she will be found soon."
Does that mean it is a more reliable review?  Or is her view not valid because the reviewer clearly has sympathy for the family and was moved by Kate's book?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Not much chance of cutting the Oriental snakeheads off at source, but the wriggling tails here are being dealt with...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7616919/Death-crash-trucker-charged-39-COUNTS-manslaughter.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7617881/Essex-migrants-death-suspects-vehicles-seized.html


Indeed the real crime lords are higher up the political spectrum. And in some instances captains of industry. little or no labour costs. I have argued this cause on this forum only to be shouted down as a rascist by the 'McCann supporters strangely enough. (Of whom some belive she was abducted and removed from Portugual-Trafficked). I know I laughed at that as well.

Snowflakes would have open borders free for all. Realists know this is not viable, and ,or sustanable for many reasons.

The life and conditions these duped people are living is unimaginable to any decent thinking person. DoI believe in illegal immigration-No. Do I believe in immigrants comming legally to work and live here- yes.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/chinese-snakehead-gang-hunted-over-20719114

[Venturi Swirl]

Reviewed by Daisy Goodwin for the Sunday Times - is Daisy a paid McCann shill?

"but one of the saddest things in this heartbreaking book is the way that Kate Healy the doctor and person in her own right has had to become Kate McCann, mother of missing Madeleine and mater dolorosa".

Or is Daisy just really stupid and her opinions worthless?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/madeleine-by-kate-mccann-7nt50mhn39b

[Admin]

I have observed an increasing tendency by some posters recently to flaunt the forum rules. There is no place for cheap remarks, sniping or goading on these boards. Do not assume that your comments go unnoticed by the admin team.

The forum rules are there to protect all users from unnecssary abuse, they should be adhered to strictly.

Admin

[Miss Taken Identity]

Whether or not a book is good is a matter of opinion, whether it's the opinion of someone being paid for their opinion or not. Kate McCann's book didn't move me at all, and it was nothing to do with me being nasty, childish or anonymous.

It shows you to be an independant thinker.. something the snowflakes want to eradicate for their own agenda.



Incidentally Hitler was nasty ,and evil to normal thinking people-but believed he was doing good for his country -what a huge fail-what is Stalins excuse?  he killed many more millions than Hitler.  He invented the thought police for that era.

[Venturi Swirl]

Another take on Kate's book by a writer in the New Statesman, which gives the completely opposite view of those expressed by anonymous McCann sceptics on the net - how is that possible?  Was the reviewer given a backhander to only write sympathetic things by Team McCann do you think?

"Madeleine is crammed with clichés of this kind, but I confess that, far from bothering me, they drew me in. Kate McCann is not a writer and makes no claims to be one - the power of her book lies in its straightforward, chatty ordinariness. It is hard, too, not to admire its complete lack of self-pity, bolstered by the McCanns’ uncomplicated though sorely tested religious faith. The agony lies in the small, casual detail".

https://www.newstatesman.com/books/2011/05/kate-mccann-madeleine-children