Author Topic: New documentary:"BURIED BY MAINSTREAM MEDIA -The True Story of Madeleine McCann.  (Read 182762 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

ferryman

  • Guest
Mentions the cadaver dogs ...

Stop right there.

 There was only one cadaver dog

Forget the rest ...

Offline xtina

Mentions the cadaver dogs ...

Stop right there.

 There was only one cadaver dog

Forget the rest ...

typical ....you don't want to see the bigger picture do you ....

blinkers on ...tunnelvision ...etc etc ...forget maddie ....as long as the mccs are protected....

forget the rest as you say ....
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline sadie

Mentions the cadaver dogs ...

Stop right there.

 There was only one cadaver dog

Forget the rest ...
You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are not aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?

Offline slartibartfast

You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are naot aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?

The critical word, if spelled right, is proved.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline xtina

You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are naot aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?


i think G.A. understood it perfectly.....he was there after all ...he saw the mccs for what they were ....he saw the change of stories .etc...etc...etc....etc..the way they were and he was not alone in his thinking was he ...

oh yes i can do logic ...its just yours is different to mine ...bit condescending isn't it ,,,,that we all have to think like you...

if we all thought the same ...there would be no justice in the world would there
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 11:38:48 PM by John »
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline xtina

You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are naot aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?



oh dear quote from the book thread...post 652....so i will decline the offer to read back on the dog`s ....seems you don't understand it ..[at best]


Quote from: Angelo222
Quote from: davel on Today at 07:03:56 AM
Amaral got it wrong. He misunderstood the evidence. Summers and Swann explain where he was wrong and they come to the same conclusion as SY...that's what upsets some posters
How do you know that Gonc misinterpreted the dog alerts?  Nobody knows at this point in time what the dogs alerted to and that includes S&S.



« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 11:44:30 PM by John »
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Brietta

i think G.A. understood it perfectly.....he was there after all ...he saw the mccs for what they were ....he saw the change of stories .etc...etc...etc....etc..the way they were and he was not alone in his thinking was he ...

oh yes i can do logic ...its just yours is different to mine ...bit condescending isn't it ,,,,that we all have to think like you...

if we all thought the same ...there would be no justice in the world would there

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?


In what manner exactly did Dr Amaral develop this in depth insight into the Drs McCann?

He didn’t ever bother to meet them or question them during his time as co-ordinator of the investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

Understandable why he goes to great lengths to gloss over those glaring omissions when he writes as if he had personal knowledge of Madeleine’s parents; just a tad disingenuous n’est-ce pas?
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline xtina

In what manner exactly did Dr Amaral develop this in depth insight into the Drs McCann?

He didn’t ever bother to meet them or question them during his time as co-ordinator of the investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

Understandable why he goes to great lengths to gloss over those glaring omissions when he writes as if he had personal knowledge of Madeleine’s parents; just a tad disingenuous n’est-ce pas?

no it isn't so...

read Sadie's post ....it was her i was replying to .....i cant even begin to understand what you are on about
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Brietta

no it isn't so...

read Sadie's post ....it was her i was replying to .....i cant even begin to understand what you are on about

Hmmm … I see … your comprehension is somehow impaired if someone else answers your posts. Please note for future reference … I read all of Sadie’s post … if you cannot carry debate forward why bother posting?

However, I think you understood well enough that Dr Amaral did not meet the Drs McCann … and that is so.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline xtina

Hmmm … I see … your comprehension is somehow impaired if someone else answers your posts. Please note for future reference … I read all of Sadie’s post … if you cannot carry debate forward why bother posting?

However, I think you understood well enough that Dr Amaral did not meet the Drs McCann … and that is so.

I think its your  your comprehension that is somehow impaired.....hammer and chisel needed i think...pleeeeeze follow this

 
Sadie's post

You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are naot aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 
...
my reply

i think G.A. understood it perfectly.....he was there after all ...he saw the mccs for what they were ....he saw the change of stories .etc...etc...etc....etc..the way they were and he was not alone in his thinking was he ...

oh yes i can do logic ...its just yours is different to mine ...bit condescending isn't it ,,,,that we all have to think like you...

if we all thought the same ...there would be no justice in the world would there

........................

now where ....have i said...Goncalo Amaral ...met the mccs.......an so is that...
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Bert Singe

You have made just one small point FM, but it illustrates the innaccuracy of the Richard report.

Everything he says about what the dogs proved is WRONG.

Xtina, I am suprised that by now, you are naot aware that everything he says about the dogs is rubbish as far as impicating the Mccanns goes.

You must make the time to read back and understand that the dogs poved nothing.    It is all outlined in this forum.  Seems Amaral didn't understand it (at best). 

Maybe you cant do logic?  Some cant.  But maybe you just haven't read it?

Dog evidence vs abduction evidence - the McCann's have been caught lying whereas the dogs have not. Even if the dog alerts are inadmissible, why back a proven liar over an innocent dog?

Offline Mr Gray

Dog evidence vs abduction evidence - the McCann's have been caught lying whereas the dogs have not. Even if the dog alerts are inadmissible, why back a proven liar over an innocent dog?

 @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

Offline slartibartfast

@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

Glad you liked and agreed with that.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.


Offline sadie

Something funny?
Just that you got it the wrong way round.  *&*%£

Amaral is the proven liar ... proven in two courts and sentence passed

The dogs proved NOTHING


As you say:
Quote
"why back a proven liar over an innocent dog?"
"

 @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

Good try tho'   

Suggest you read the dog threads and make sure you understand just what the dogs did and did NOT prove.

They proved NOTHING, Bert, but the proven liar said they did.