Does the Madeleine Fund have a moral obligation to transparency?

[G-Unit]

[/b]

I presume you had your tongue firmly in your cheek when you typed that G-Unit.

In my experience - the rule of thumb amongst sceptics is:-

 'Everything the McCanns do is wrong -  and everything the McCanns say is wrong'  .  And that's how it's been for  as long as I've been following the case. 

Nothing but NOTHING goes uncriticised - and when even raising money for charity is used as something to criticise them for - then what chance do they stand of doing/saying anything that won't get criticised.

'No chance' is the answer.

Just like their supporters I don't care if they spent it all on lollypops. The difference is I wouldn't praise them for doing it. If someone promises transparency but doesn't deliver it then you can't blame people who wonder why? No criticism is possible unless people behave in such a way as to appear evasive.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Just like their supporters I don't care if they spent it all on lollypops. The difference is I wouldn't praise them for doing it. If someone promises transparency but doesn't deliver it then you can't blame people who wonder why? No criticism is possible unless people behave in such a way as to appear evasive.

Indeed. and for the third time... has anyone got a good reason for them not to provide transperancy?

[stephen25000]

I think you might be confusing factually accurate comment with 'abuse'.

I know exactly what you are, but I'm too polite to do so on here.

Though it has been said by others elsewhere.

and that doesn't include your unmitigated devotion to the mccanns.

[G-Unit]

You are joking.  Some seem to see him as a hero to be admired, a man of integrity. 

Personally, I see him as a bent incompetent copper who saw a chance to make some money on the back of a missing little girl.  And as soon as he got his hands on some dosh he set about spending it like a nouveau riche chav - the jag, the earring (he's a fifty year old bloke for gods sake) the parties, cosmetic surgery for the missus.

I think the facts, and the authorities that actually matter, rather support my viewpoint. 



 

He didn't realise that only certain people are allowed to make money off the back of a missing little girl.

[Mr Gray]

He didn't realise that only certain people are allowed to make money off the back of a missing little girl.

so he thought everyone could...nice...for once I agree with you

[stephen25000]

so he thought everyone could...nice...for once I agree with you

So who else has made money from this case ?

Clearly S and S made b....r all.

[mercury]

So who else has made money from this case ?

Clearly S and S made b....r all.

 

Serves them right too

[Miss Taken Identity]

The parents made a lot of money from MADDIES fate (what ever that was/is). the media continue to make money as - do the parents. I think this is disgusting...  and this post will get whooshed. even though it is factual!

[stephen25000]

Serves them right too

Great book rehashing known material.

As for the opening pages, pure Mills and Boon.

[Mr Gray]

The parents made a lot of money from MADDIES fate (what ever that was/is). the media continue to make money as - do the parents. I think this is disgusting...  and this post will get whooshed. even though it is factual!

that is so not true...but like others continue to believe lies...it's far more interesting than the truth

[stephen25000]

that is so not true...but like others continue to believe lies...it's far more interesting than the truth

Why is it untrue ?

[mercury]

Great book rehashing known material.

As for the opening pages, pure Mills and Boon.

Mills and Boon more interesting, not always that predictable!

[Mr Gray]

Why is it untrue ?

because it's untrue

[stephen25000]

Mills and Boon more interesting, not always that predictable!

Have you read the opening page ?

It was hard to stomach ?

[stephen25000]

because it's untrue

That is a meaningless statement.