The last video taken of Madeleine McCann.

[Miss Taken Identity]

If swearing in front of children is not considered by. some to be harmful in some way, then why so much sanctimonious tut-tutting about Gerry’s alleged use of the word in front of children?  I’m not sure what you’re wanting a cite for btw.  Also, MM disappearing due to inhaling second-hand smoke?  Come again??

It has been mentioned already. some supporters took exception and denied that Gerry swore. They refused to accept that he did.  for what ever reason I believe it was to sell the myth that they were this perfect catholic family who did nothing wrong. I mentioned that it showed hom to be arrogant and self centered- which it does.

The smoking comparison was to demonstrate your comparison was a pile of... and was useless to the discussion.
 

[misty]

You are absolutely correct Sunny. If this was to be shown on TV the sound technicians would dub over or remove all or part of the  video. They would certainly not allow the words ' FO' to be heard by the viewing public.

However, I have my very own evidence which convinced me and others. We have a sign language /lip reading expert translator . Asked to look at the silent video,it was slowed down, and she wrote down what was said. FO was what was said. I trust her implicitly. She sympathises with the family so no bias at all.

I also  know this to be true as I have other information from someone in the know. I am doing a Sadie and Davel here -NO not going to name names...

Are you able to provide a transcript of what Gerry did say, according to your lip-reading friend,  while the camera was still on Gerry, please? I am also puzzled that the audio at the end has Dianne saying "bye bye" but her lip movement on camera is at odds with that imo.

[Robittybob1]

If you go to the YT version https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=p1AlT1Jg0fw  you can alter the playback speed.  I found playing it back at 1.5 normal speed the words are really clear.
"we are off"  I'm really going to enjoy myself"  is what I hear.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It has been mentioned already. some supporters took exception and denied that Gerry swore. They refused to accept that he did.  for what ever reason I believe it was to sell the myth that they were this perfect catholic family who did nothing wrong. I mentioned that it showed hom to be arrogant and self centered- which it does.

The smoking comparison was to demonstrate your comparison was a pile of... and was useless to the discussion.
 

In your opinion. 

[Robittybob1]

If you go to the YT version https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=6&v=p1AlT1Jg0fw  you can alter the playback speed.  I found playing it back at 1.5 normal speed the words are really clear.
"we are off"  I'm really going to enjoy myself"  is what I hear.

Did anyone check my joke?

[G-Unit]

It’s not behaviour you should have been indulging in, in front of children is it?  Vastly more harmful than letting slip the odd F-word IMO.

We took our children for a walk and a pre-lunch drink on Sundays sometimes. You sound very silly trying to make that sound like child abuse.

[Vertigo Swirl]

We took our children for a walk and a pre-lunch drink on Sundays sometimes. You sound very silly trying to make that sound like child abuse.

In your opinion.  I simply pointed out the double standard.  You would never swear in front of your children but would think nothing of smoking and drinking in front of them, behaviour which is known to be potentially harmful in the long term, far more so to the child than the occasional swear word.  I did not use the term “child abuse”, but if you will insist on coming over all holier-than-thou I will point out the hypocrisy in the argument.  If you discover your 9 year old with a packet of fags and drunk on cider you are presumably going to advise him that this is not wise behaviour, and when he says “well, you do it”, you will reply...?

[jassi]

In your opinion. I simply pointed out the double standard.  You would never swear in front of your children but would think nothing of smoking and drinking in front of them, behaviour which is known to be potentially harmful in the long term, far more so to the child than the occasional swear word.  I did not use the term “child abuse”, but if you will insist on coming over all holier-than-thou I will point out the hypocrisy in the argument.  If you discover your 9 year old with a packet of fags and drunk on cider you are presumably going to advise him that this is not wise behaviour, and when he says “well, you do it”, you will reply...?

Why?
Other than to take an argumentative stance, of what importance is it ?

[G-Unit]

In your opinion.  I simply pointed out the double standard.  You would never swear in front of your children but would think nothing of smoking and drinking in front of them, behaviour which is known to be potentially harmful in the long term, far more so to the child than the occasional swear word.  I did not use the term “child abuse”, but if you will insist on coming over all holier-than-thou I will point out the hypocrisy in the argument.  If you discover your 9 year old with a packet of fags and drunk on cider you are presumably going to advise him that this is not wise behaviour, and when he says “well, you do it”, you will reply...?

Now you're getting even more ridiculous. The standards of 2018 can't be applied to 1972. Do nine year old's get drunk on cider in 2018 because they go for a pub lunch and see their parents with alcoholic drinks? Please try to be sensible and stick to the subject; swearing in front of toddlers. .

[Vertigo Swirl]

Now you're getting even more ridiculous. The standards of 2018 can't be applied to 1972. Do nine year old's get drunk on cider in 2018 because they go for a pub lunch and see their parents with alcoholic drinks? Please try to be sensible and stick to the subject; swearing in front of toddlers. .

Who mentioned 1972?  I notice you completely ignored the question.   If it is your contention that children are not influenced by their parents’ behaviour  then what is your problem with the occasional naughty word said in front of them?  If anyone is being ridiculous and making mountains out of molehills well it certainly isn’t me!

[slartibartfast]

Please keep it civilised. Cut out the aggression.

[G-Unit]

Who mentioned 1972?  I notice you completely ignored the question.   If it is your contention that children are not influenced by their parents’ behaviour  then what is your problem with the occasional naughty word said in front of them?  If anyone is being ridiculous and making mountains out of molehills well it certainly isn’t me!

My argument was that parents should lead by example rather than expecting their children to do as they say not as they do. You then tried to suggest that children going for a Sunday lunch time visit to the pub with their parents were in danger of being found drunk on cider at the age of nine! A bit OTT in my opinion.

[Robittybob1]

kids will be kids.

[Vertigo Swirl]

My argument was that parents should lead by example rather than expecting their children to do as they say not as they do. You then tried to suggest that children going for a Sunday lunch time visit to the pub with their parents were in danger of being found drunk on cider at the age of nine! A bit OTT in my opinion.

You have very clearly misunderstood, deliberately or otherwise I’m not sure.  At no point did I ever say that going for a drink before Sunday lunch would lead to your child getting drunk at the age of 9.  Parents “leading by example” however has proven to increase the likelihood of children becoming smokers and drinkers if they regularly observe their parents partaking in such activities.  I can provide cites if required.   If it’s kids learning swear words then this is bad in your opinion,  and parents should not swear in front of kids, despite the fact that it does no real harm.  The same however cannot be said for smoking and drinking which can cause harm in later life, but which you appear to have no issue whatsoever with doing in front of your kids.  Personally I would rather my child be exposed to the odd swear word coming out of my mouth than to have me exhaling fag breath in their direction on a daily basis, silly and ridiculous though it may seem to you.  Swearing in front of the kids occasionally is no biggie, and to use Gerry’s “eff off” as yet another stick with which to beat him smacks of pettiness and making something out of nothing. IMO.

[Mr Gray]

I think parents smoked around children because it seemed safe at the time...a bit like the McCann's decision