Were the half hour visual checks a convenient invention after the fact?

[mercury]

The forum has discussed along these lines already http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2002.msg64369#msg64369.
The "crass, evil" statement is just another piece of misinformation put about on certain internet blogs this time targetting Robert Mendick for some reason best known to themselves ...

Quote
Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.
Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
By Robert Mendick9:00PM GMT 06 Mar 2010
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

Do you have a cite for the original article which makes reference to Guilhermino Encarnacao being an "object removed"?  I can find it on blogs ... some with quaint names ... but I can't find the original.

The original was changed, thats why you cant find it

The original was captured though before it was

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/35march10/TELEGRAPH_06_03_10.htm

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic6621.html

Neither of whch are obscure blogs but very efficient info capture and indexing

You will have also got the waybackmachine copy but unfortunately the date of the article was the only day they did not capture the site

PS it was not "an object" but an "obstacle"

A further obstacle was removed with the death from stomach cancer two weeks ago of Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve

And yes, it was a crass way of referring to his death

And no, I was not " targetting any particular journalist for the fun of it, just making a valid observation of a cold and callous reference.
Im sure if it was Amaral he was referring to you might consider the reference not strong enough

Lastly,interesting to see that the journalist targetted this man as the reason for newspaper leaks rather than Amaral, something must have been lost in translation I guess

So, glad to have sorted that out for you and proven it was not a myth made up by people for reasons "known only to themselves"

Cheers

[G-Unit]

Amaral widely discredited and facing financial ruin in 2010. Six years later the playing field has levelled somewhat, it seems. Thanks mostly to UK fundraising he was able to appeal and if he wins in the Supreme Court it's the McCanns facing a big payout.

[Brietta]

The original was changed, thats why you cant find it

The original was captured though before it was

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/35march10/TELEGRAPH_06_03_10.htm

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic6621.html

Neither of whch are obscure blogs but very efficient info capture and indexing

You will have also got the waybackmachine copy but unfortunately the date of the article was the only day they did not capture the site

PS it was not "an object" but an "obstacle"

A further obstacle was removed with the death from stomach cancer two weeks ago of Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve

And yes, it was a crass way of referring to his death

And no, I was not " targetting any particular journalist for the fun of it, just making a valid observation of a cold and callous reference.
Im sure if it was Amaral he was referring to you might consider the reference not strong enough

Lastly,interesting to see that the journalist targetted this man as the reason for newspaper leaks rather than Amaral, something must have been lost in translation I guess

So, glad to have sorted that out for you and proven it was not a myth made up by people for reasons "known only to themselves"

Cheers

I see.

• according to you the original article printed in the Telegraph was "changed"
• according to you the only day the waybackmachine didn't record the Telegraph was the day that article was printed

In my opinion the sentence to which you refer never appeared in the Telegraph and is an obvious fabrication like so much else from similar sources.

[mercury]

I see.

• according to you the original article printed in the Telegraph was "changed"
• according to you the only day the waybackmachine didn't record the Telegraph was the day that article was printed

In my opinion the sentence to which you refer never appeared in the Telegraph and is an obvious fabrication like so much else from similar sources.

Why are you so desperate to say all the above?


It is NOT according to ME that the waybackmachne did not snapshot the day that the article appeared, its on the waybackmachne free to peruse (i did not see 14 mar 2010 was also not captured but shame just two days out of all the mnths are missing )
it is NOT according to ME the original article was amended, theres proof it was UNLESS you want to accuse Pamalam and the news archiver Jilly on the MCF forum of delberately inserting those words


I fail to see the desperation about something a journalist said when far worst has been said

All a little odd at best
The questin YOU have to ask yourself is why it is impossible or improbably said journalist said those words and its a bit ungrateful of you to accuse both the sites i posted to as fabricating

PROVE IT dear or redact it

PROVE A SINGLE INSTANCE of fabricating news stories on the maddiecasefiles forum or pamalams news index

You cant
You wll fail 100 per cent so an apology for slandering them is due
This is a facts and evidence based forum john admin and mr moderator tell us time and time again
You asked for the facts
You got them
But dont accept them
Thats YOUR problem Brietta and no one elses

[Brietta]

Why are you so desperate to say all the above?


It is NOT according to ME that the waybackmachne did not snapshot the day that the article appeared, its on the waybackmachne free to peruse (i did not see 14 mar 2010 was also not captured but shame just two days out of all the mnths are missing )
it is NOT according to ME the original article was amended, theres proof it was UNLESS you want to accuse Pamalam and the news archiver Jilly on the MCF forum of delberately inserting those words


I fail to see the desperation about something a journalist said when far worst has been said

All a little odd at best
The questin YOU have to ask yourself is why it is impossible or improbably said journalist said those words and its a bit ungrateful of you to accuse both the sites i posted to as fabricating

PROVE IT dear or redact it

PROVE A SINGLE INSTANCE of fabricating news stories on the maddiecasefiles forum or pamalams news index

You cant
You wll fail 100 per cent so an apology for slandering them is due
This is a facts and evidence based forum john admin and mr moderator tell us time and time again
You asked for the facts
You got them
But dont accept them
Thats YOUR problem Brietta and no one elses

I believe it was you who raised the issue.  I was rather bemused that the version you have referred to appears only on anti McCann sites.

Very much calling to mind the infamous fridge allegation. 

[mercury]

I believe it was you who raised the issue.  I was rather bemused that the version you have referred to appears only on anti McCann sites.

Very much calling to mind the infamous fridge allegation.

I initially responded to a question about why a reconstruction was not done straight away and that iirc it wasthis officer rather than amaral that said no to it
Then sadie came on sayng IF he is dead etc etc

Which lead me to remember awful journalistic accounts
Youre absolutely ridiculous in the face ofevidence assertion that this is anything like the "fridge allegations" is embarrassing at best

Now go prove all my links are fakes, off you go brietta

Being on anti mccann sites is a pathetic excuse for your performance here as they more than any would want the facts recorded as real as any

[Brietta]

I initially responded to a question about why a reconstruction was not done straight away and that iirc it wasthis officer rather than amaral that said no to it
Then sadie came on sayng IF he is dead etc etc

Which lead me to remember awful journalistic accounts
Youre absolutely ridiculous in the face ofevidence assertion that this is anything like the "fridge allegations" is embarrassing at best

Now go prove all my links are fakes, off you go brietta

Being on anti mccann sites is a pathetic excuse for your performance here as they more than any would want the facts recorded as real as any

It is very simple, Mercury.

The actual newspaper article differs from the reproductions on anti McCann sites as noticed by DCI on this forum over three years ago.     http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2002.msg64369#msg64369.

[Alice Purjorick]

Somebody put them both up side by side then we can play spot the difference.
That would be much more productive...

[mercury]

It is very simple, Mercury.

The actual newspaper article differs from the reproductions on anti McCann sites as noticed by DCI on this forum over three years ago.     http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2002.msg64369#msg64369.

Nope, the actual newspaper article is any article that was printed and/or printed and then amended
Ok
Let me get this straight

You believe that the member on MCF site called Jilly who was responsible for capturing whatever news items were available  each day on case and diligently did this for years and years, one day woke up and whilst capturing the Telegraph article by Mr Mendick, thought, "I know, I might amend that to say something very controversial"

The controversial sayingbeing "an obstacle removed"

Seriously?

Same goes for Pamalam

Surely then you will have lots of examples of said news manipulation, no?

You might not like the idea that people, even if "sceptics" record info honestly

It is true that journalists have altered their words and amended their articles and Mr Mendick and/or his newspaper very possibly got a complaint or two from either his own paper or from others


But  it really does remain your problem
It also is very strange you are supporting a journo you know nothing about or what he did but jumping on some ridiculous bandwagon that all anti mccann sites are full of bogus news articles with no evidence whatsoever

That only proves you will support the ridiculous to support the mccanns
But you can shoot yourself in the foot whilst doing so

[mercury]

Somebody put them both up side by side then we can play spot the difference.
That would be much more productive...

Up and down, cant do side by side

But with the senior officer in charge Goncalo Amaral now widely discredited and facing financial ruin after being sued for libel by the McCanns over a book he wrote, it may become harder for the Portuguese to refuse the request for a thorough review.
The revelation that possible leads – many passed to Portuguese police by the McCanns' own private detectives – had apparently been ignored will add to the clamour.
Last week, details emerged of a series of possible sightings of Madeleine, who was just three when she vanished.
Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.
Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We can confirm that the Home Secretary had a private meeting with Kate and Gerry McCann.


Vs

But with the senior officer in charge Goncalo Amaral now widely discredited and facing financial ruin after being sued for libel by the McCanns over a book he wrote, it may become harder for the Portuguese to refuse the request for a thorough review.
The revelation that possible leads – many passed to Portuguese police by the McCanns' own private detectives – had apparently been ignored will add to the clamour.
Last week, details emerged of a series of possible sightings of Madeleine, who was just three when she vanished.
A further obstacle was removed with the death from stomach cancer two weeks ago of Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve.
Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We can confirm that the Home Secretary had a private meeting with Kate and Gerry McCann.

[Brietta]

Nope, the actual newspaper article is any article that was printed and/or printed and then amended
Ok
Let me get this straight

You believe that the member on MCF site called Jilly who was responsible for capturing whatever news items were available  each day on case and diligently did this for years and years, one day woke up and whilst capturing the Telegraph article by Mr Mendick, thought, "I know, I might amend that to say something very controversial"

The controversial sayingbeing "an obstacle removed"

Seriously?

Same goes for Pamalam

Surely then you will have lots of examples of said news manipulation, no?

You might not like the idea that people, even if "sceptics" record info honestly

It is true that journalists have altered their words and amended their articles and Mr Mendick and/or his newspaper very possibly got a complaint or two from either his own paper or from others


But  it really does remain your problem
It also is very strange you are supporting a journo you know nothing about or what he did but jumping on some ridiculous bandwagon that all anti mccann sites are full of bogus news articles with no evidence whatsoever

That only proves you will support the ridiculous to support the mccanns
But you can shoot yourself in the foot whilst doing so

CORRECTION: This article originally stated that merchandise sold at a Momentum event  ...  ...  ...  We are happy to make this clear. The article has been amended.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/09/29/jeremy-corbyn-thinks-the-state-should-do-everything-except-its-j/

Update: This article has been amended since it was first posted  ...  ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11381925/Another-Birmingham-school-put-in-special-measures-amid-Trojan-Horse-fears.html

Update: This article has been amended since it was first posted in order to clarify certain matters. The original said that ...  ...  ...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9992229/EU-pours-millions-into-groups-seeking-state-control-of-press.html

Please note when changes have been made to printed newspaper articles ... it is customary for these changes, amendments, corrections to be publicised.
The Telegraph article already posted on the forum and which I have re-posted carries no such intimation of change having occurred.
As you will note from the three links provided, it is customary for the Telegraph to notify changes made;  there are many, many more similar examples from MSM.

Don't believe everything posted on the internet, particularly when it appears only on fora which have a particular axe to grind.  I believe this to be very much a case in point.

Now may we please make the effort to get back on topic ... thank you. 

Although this could be considered an example of how disinformation may be disseminated particularly by amateurs with inflexible opinions dabbling with information they just do not understand.

[mercury]

So youre accusing pamalam and mcf files of deliberateky altering news stories, yes? Or no?

If yes you will have to come up with evidence

[Brietta]

So youre accusing pamalam and mcf files of deliberateky altering news stories, yes? Or no?

If yes you will have to come up with evidence

I have given you factual information.  It is entirely up to you how you choose to interpret that.

[sadie]

It is very simple, Mercury.

The actual newspaper article differs from the reproductions on anti McCann sites as noticed by DCI on this forum over three years ago.     http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2002.msg64369#msg64369.

DCI was a brilliant sleuth and provider of info.  Hope s/he is well.  You are really good too Brietta. 

[mercury]

I have given you factual information.  It is entirely up to you how you choose to interpret that.

Sorry but i must have missed it
What was your factual info that proves that the recording of paper articles on two and more sites was deliberately corrupt? Lets hear it