Why don't the McCanns put up Madeleine posters abroad like they ask of others?

[Mrs. B]

This whole thread is a perfect example of how myths get started. Someone makes an assumption based on a tabloid story, but not even on what was actually reported, but on what was NOT reported. That assumption (still based on a nothing) then turns into - "Kate McCann did not put up any posters in PDL & that's a FACT."

It's almost like Bennett's crazy idea that you can accuse people of whatever you want, if they then don't deny it publicly, you can start stating it as a fact. Total lunacy.

[faithlilly]

The Express failed to report that Kate McCann took either breakfast, lunch OR dinner whilst in PdL.  Extrapolating on the known facts I conclude she must have been on hunger strike whilst in Portugal.

It's as a ludicrous assumption as the sad gossip who claimed the McCann's were splitting up on account of Gerry being spotted in one interview not wearing his wedding ring. Absolutely bonkers.

That is bonkers Mrs B. I'm sure he just took it off to wash his hands.

[gilet]

This whole thread is a perfect example of how myths get started. Someone makes an assumption based on a tabloid story, but not even on what was actually reported, but on what was NOT reported. That assumption (still based on a nothing) then turns into - "Kate McCann did not put up any posters in PDL & that's a FACT."

It's almost like Bennett's crazy idea that you can accuse people of whatever you want, if they then don't deny it publicly, you can start stating it as a fact. Total lunacy.

Excellent post.

Myths start from guesswork or deliberate deceptions.

In this case your outlining of the route from guess based on tabloid omissions is spot on.

Its a shame that some posters like Faithlilly put such great store in guesswork to the point that they goad others to make guesses on a regular basis.

Personally, I set no store by guesswork and prefer to rely on facts, questions and evidenced replies.

Each to his own, but I know that guesses (especially those base on tabloid omissions) do not get you anywhere than the High Court where you are convicted and jailed for libel.

[registrar]

Utter bilge.

Perhaps your level of discussion is all about guesswork. That kind of attitude gets you precisely nowhere.

My level of discussion is based on facts, questions and evidenced responses to those questions. It is called research. Hypotheses are not simply guesses but carefully considered possibilities. Police don't just guess who committed a crime (well intelligent and efficient police don't) but they work from known facts and proceed carefully from those.

Guesswork and idle speculation may be satisfactory for some posters. Faithlilly for example is constantly asking for guesses but those seeking truth don't go down that pathway, genuine truth seekers prefer evidence and facts.

strewth you have been rattled 

job well done then

[gilet]

strewth you have been rattled 

job well done then

Again you fail to address the issues and play your silly game of disruption.
If you think people cannot see that your posts are immature and content free then perhaps you really are that immature.

[Mrs. B]

The Express failed to report that Kate McCann took either breakfast, lunch OR dinner whilst in PdL.  Extrapolating on the known facts I conclude she must have been on hunger strike whilst in Portugal.

It's as a ludicrous assumption as the sad gossip who claimed the McCann's were splitting up on account of Gerry being spotted in one interview not wearing his wedding ring. Absolutely bonkers.

That is bonkers Mrs B. I'm sure he just took it off to wash his hands.

Yes, it is bonkers, utterly & totally.

[gilet]

The Express failed to report that Kate McCann took either breakfast, lunch OR dinner whilst in PdL.  Extrapolating on the known facts I conclude she must have been on hunger strike whilst in Portugal.

It's as a ludicrous assumption as the sad gossip who claimed the McCann's were splitting up on account of Gerry being spotted in one interview not wearing his wedding ring. Absolutely bonkers.

That is bonkers Mrs B. I'm sure he just took it off to wash his hands.

Yes, it is bonkers, utterly & totally.

Even when admitting that the idea of a ring being missing is not proof of imminent divorce, Faithlilly cannot resist having a go at another guess, the washing of hands.

The truth is that either is possible and neither is proven by the omission of a ring.

To rely on the single omission of a ring and claim either possibilities as fact is in reality bonkers. Both would need to be backed up with real evidence.

It is the kind of mistake Tony Bennett frequently made and others of his persuasion still make today. It leads nowhere near the goal of truth and can lead directly to jail instead. 

[faithlilly]

Even when admitting that the idea of a ring being missing is not proof of imminent divorce, Faithlilly cannot resist having a go at another guess, the washing of hands.

The truth is that either is possible and neither is proven by the omission of a ring.

To rely on the single omission of a ring and claim either possibilities as fact is in reality bonkers. Both would need to be backed up with real evidence.

It is the kind of mistake Tony Bennett frequently made and others of his persuasion still make today. It leads nowhere near the goal of truth and can lead directly to jail instead.

The washing of hands ? Please explain as it seems you have taken a perfectly simple and straightforward statement and twisted it into something sinister.

Seems you are either desperate to discredit my posts or so paranoid you can no longer differentiate between reality and your fevered imagination ?

[gilet]

The washing of hands ? Please explain as it seems you have taken a perfectly simple and straightforward statement and twisted it into something sinister.

Seems you are either desperate to discredit my posts or so paranoid you can no longer differentiate between reality and your fevered imagination ?

I will willingly clarify my post.

You were dismissive (whether seriously or otherwise) of the claim that the omission of the ring was a sign of imminent divorce. Such a suggestion would simply be guesswork based on something which didn't prove any such thing.

But in posting this you added a further guess of your own, the washing of hands.

I pointed out that this was symptomatic of your posting and demands on the forum. You have made frequent demands for me to make guesses about things for example which I have declined on each occasion as I do not believe guesswork is of any real value.

There is absolutely nothing paranoid about my posting or feverishly imaginative.

It is perfectly obvious to readers that in dismissing the guess regarding divorce, you introduced a further guess regarding washing of hands. Neither is a proven fact based only on the omission of a ring, though both are possible.

I can provide full evidence of your demands for guesses if you have forgotten that you have made them and you think that might help you to understand what I am getting at in the post.

[registrar]

I will willingly clarify my post.

You were dismissive (whether seriously or otherwise) of the claim that the omission of the ring was a sign of imminent divorce. Such a suggestion would simply be guesswork based on something which didn't prove any such thing.

But in posting this you added a further guess of your own, the washing of hands.

I pointed out that this was symptomatic of your posting and demands on the forum. You have made frequent demands for me to make guesses about things for example which I have declined on each occasion as I do not believe guesswork is of any real value.

There is absolutely nothing paranoid about my posting or feverishly imaginative.

It is perfectly obvious to readers that in dismissing the guess regarding divorce, you introduced a further guess regarding washing of hands. Neither is a proven fact based only on the omission of a ring, though both are possible.

I can provide full evidence of your demands for guesses if you have forgotten that you have made them and you think that might help you to understand what I am getting at in the post.

Brilliant prose I'm sure

can we have that in TWO sentences please?

We all have lives to get on with

[Matthew Wyse]

The McCanns promote the idea that somehow British tourists going abroad should take Madeleine posters with them and put them up eberywhere yet there is no evidence that the Mccanns practice what they preach.   Can anyone show a picture of any McCann putting up even one poster?   QED 


Dont all rush

[faithlilly]

The McCanns promote the idea that somehow British tourists going abroad should take Madeleine posters with them and put them up eberywhere yet there is no evidence that the Mccanns practice what they preach.   Can anyone show a picture of any McCann putting up even one poster?   QED 


Dont all rush

There's several of them putting up posters on their ill-fated trip to Huelva but I think that's it.

[amaraltheofficeboy]

[amaraltheofficeboy]

[amaraltheofficeboy]

as I posted before - I very much doubt that people in PDL want posters of Madeleine.

whereas other holiday makers can post them on the Mccanns behalf all over Portugal and Spain