New documentary:"BURIED BY MAINSTREAM MEDIA -The True Story of Madeleine McCann.

[Benice]

Actually, I haven't seen all 4 videos.

The fourth one is of interest.

As to media control, look up the actions of Carter-Ruck in this case, and the threat of libel action, which to put it mildly has put off the press running stories, but you know that.

When did you last see an interview with the mccanns when they were asked questions beyond the parameters of the Mitchell PR mchine ?

We have seen such 'events' in Portugal, where the press do ask questions avoided in the UK and the subsequent raising of the hackles of the mccanns.

Have you ever asked yourself why many people don't believe the mccanns story ?

Similarly, do you really believe all members of the UK Police force believe their story either ?

Sorry Stephen I got the impression (as you were asking others to confirm  whether or not they had watched the videos)  - that you had in fact watched them all yourself.

So can I take it you don't know what Richard Hall's conspiracy theory re Kennedy's involvement was?     Fair enough   - neither do I.    Maybe someone else can enlighten us.

[Alfred R Jones]

Hall's video doesn't really draw any conclusions apart from "we're being kept in the dark by the mainstream media" (despite the fact that much of his source material IS the mainstream media itself).  In short, it's barely worth the 0s and 1s that have gone into its making. 

[Alfred R Jones]

One of the defining characteristics of ALL conspiracy theories is that there has been a major cover up usually involving the "high-ups", for reasons that are mostly too unfathomable for mere mortals to get their heads around.  Of course, the more seasoned [ censored word ] will be bold enough to venture a motive, the rest are happy just to go along with whatever nonsense they are being fed by people like Hall without really, really thinking about it.  It's quite tedious really, and oftentimes extremely offensive as per: Lee Rigby, Sandy Hook, 9/11 and this case etc

[Alfred R Jones]

If the author of blogs regarding Madeleine McCann as the Second Coming have been withdrawn one can only hope that it's because their author has finally seen sense and realised that this sort of thing is a wholly unnecessarry and inappropriate distraction from the case itself.

[Eleanor]

But what do we think of The Videos?  That is the question.

[faithlilly]

But what do we think of The Videos?  That is the question.

Badly researched and unimportant.

[Jean-Pierre]

Badly researched and unimportant.

Well at least we can agree on something. 

[Eleanor]

Badly researched and unimportant.

My thoughts exactly.  A bit of a pity really.  I spent four hours last Sunday morning waiting for a revelation.  But it was raining, so no harm done.
But I can't help wondering why he did it.

[Alfred R Jones]

Badly researched and unimportant.

May one inquire then as to why you saw fit to bring them to this forum's attention by starting a thread about them, which you kicked off with the words "interesting video"?

[Eleanor]

May one inquire then as to why you saw fit to bring them to this forum's attention by starting a thread about them, which you kicked off with the words "interesting video"?

Well, they are interesting, even if only in their entire lack of content.  You can't blame Faithlily for that.
And let's face it, we did all want to talk about them.

[Alfred R Jones]

Well, they are interesting, even if only in their entire lack of content.  You can't blame Faithlily for that.
And let's face it, we did all want to talk about them.

I thought they were the opposite of interesting myself, apart from as objects of ridicule I suppose.

[faithlilly]

If you are paying for the PIs you can control the information coming in and also what is going out, as the McCanns did with the Oakley report. Also by hiring detectives it gives veracity to their claim of a search.

Ah you say but had the detectives found any evidence of wrongdoing by the McCanns wouldn't they be duty found to pass it to the police. We'll you would have thought so, wouldn't you but that's not what happened. The Oakley report certainly flagged up cause for concern in the tapas statements but due to the confidentiality clause they had signed the PIs were unable to divulge any of their findings to anyone outside the fund.

And no the report wasn't written by anyone who appeared at the trial.

Your turn !

[ edited ]

[Alfred R Jones]

If you are paying for the PIs you can control the information coming in and also what is going out, as the McCanns did with the Oakley report. Also by hiring detectives it gives veracity to their claim of a search.

Ah you say but had the detectives found any evidence of wrongdoing by the McCanns wouldn't they be duty found to pass it to the police. We'll you would have thought so, wouldn't you but that's not what happened. The Oakley report certainly flagged up cause for concern in the tapas statements but due to the confidentiality clause they had signed the PIs were unable to divulge any of their findings to anyone outside the fund.

And no the report wasn't written by anyone who appeared at the trial.

Your turn !

We've had this discussion before I fear.  No confidentiality clause is worth the paper it's written on if information discovered about a criminal act is witheld from the police.  Over to you.

ETA: the above was written in haste and should have said: no confidentiality clause is worth the paper it's written on if the information unearthed is evidence of a crime having been perpetrated, in fact witholding that information would be a crime in itself, and so over to you now.

[Wonderfulspam]

I haven't watched all the docu's, so I wouldn't know what he thinks.

I got 10 minutes into the first one & couldn't be bothered with the rest.

[Eleanor]

I haven't watched all the docu's, so I wouldn't know what he thinks.

I got 10 minutes into the first one & couldn't be bothered with the rest.

Thanks for that admission.  I very much doubt that you are alone.  But you certainly didn't miss much.