the McCanns

[Special K]

The only thing these mealy-mouthed evasions say is that you have no idea what goes on in a newsroom, and no idea how journalists work.

 

 

Yeah, but that doesn't stop Pap and his ilk having an opinion on something they know nothing about and then using that as apparent justification for their theories usually based on nothing more than it is the alternative to the generally accepted. It's already been proved on other threads he has no knowledge of Police procedure, criminal investigative procedures, the laws of physics, construction of buildings, etc, but that doesn't stop him "questioning" these things, from the comfort of his own home and with that cozy arm of internet based research from the blogs of internet crackpots and no-marks. I'd like to know how many FoI requests he's made? How many times he's got off his arse and tried to understand Police procedures and how he's done it? How often he's experienced any investigative journalism? What previous breakthroughs he’s made in any form of investigation? I cannot say for certain, but i'd be surprised if it exceeded f..k all.

 

It's far easier to sit at home, adopting the hurt posture of a suppressed internet warrior, trying to bring light to the masses (another self-delusionary by-product of the Conspiracy Theorist) with nothing more than a laptop and a list of websites, than it is to get up and get out there seeking the truth with something tangible and real. Of course the argument here is that proper "work" curtails this, but quite honestly if the number and frequency of posts in this forum take up a not inconsiderable amount of Pap's time which may be better spent trying to prove his assertions.

[sadoldgit]

As Itaintforever said they probably were covering up something - just not anything to do with her abduction or killing. You have to remember they were all (not just the McCanns) facing the possibility of being charged with child neglect or abandonment for leaving their children unattended. They probably lied to cover up how long they left them for and whether they were sober enough to make good judgements.

 

Maybe. Who knows? Shame that they haven't been charged for child neglect.

[notnowcato]

Why all the hate for Pap?? There is so much hate that any "normal" person would start to wonder why....

[pap]

Yeah, but that doesn't stop Pap and his ilk having an opinion on something they know nothing about and then using that as apparent justification for their theories usually based on nothing more than it is the alternative to the generally accepted. It's already been proved on other threads he has no knowledge of Police procedure, criminal investigative procedures, the laws of physics, construction of buildings, etc, but that doesn't stop him "questioning" these things, from the comfort of his own home and with that cozy arm of internet based research from the blogs of internet crackpots and no-marks. I'd like to know how many FoI requests he's made? How many times he's got off his arse and tried to understand Police procedures and how he's done it? How often he's experienced any investigative journalism? What previous breakthroughs he’s made in any form of investigation? I cannot say for certain, but i'd be surprised if it exceeded f..k all.

 

It's far easier to sit at home, adopting the hurt posture of a suppressed internet warrior, trying to bring light to the masses (another self-delusionary by-product of the Conspiracy Theorist) with nothing more than a laptop and a list of websites, than it is to get up and get out there seeking the truth with something tangible and real. Of course the argument here is that proper "work" curtails this, but quite honestly if the number and frequency of posts in this forum take up a not inconsiderable amount of Pap's time which may be better spent trying to prove his assertions.

 

Mods, can we change the title of the thread please? Evidently, few are interested in the specifics of the McCanns case. The thread might get more traffic if people knew up front that it was just people coming along to have a judge. Ta.

[pap]

Why all the hate for Pap?? There is so much hate that any "normal" person would start to wonder why....

 

I've often wondered why would one be so offended with the contents of my head, especially since those that take the most offence decry me as mental all the time, anyway.

[CB Fry]

I like it when Pap gets his self-help book out, with its lickle numbered sections and everything.

 

That's when you know he's really on the front foot.

[pap]

I like it when Pap gets his self-help book out, with its lickle numbered sections and everything.

 

That's when you know he's really on the front foot.

 

If I had my entire posting style enumerated on a single web page, I'd probably try to rubbish it too

[aintforever]

Someone who looks on websites about forum posting styles is definitely not mental.

[pap]

Someone who looks on websites about forum posting styles is definitely not mental.

 

Nah, I agree. Just informed.

 

I quite like the way you combine accusations of mental illness with sustained insults. I mean, if you all believe I'm genuinely mentally ill, then it does lead one to some interesting questions. How does it work in real life, for example? Do you all phone each other up and head down to the DOP? Find someone with mental illness and then let rip? What about ad-hoc opportunities, like when you see mentally ill people out and about in town?

 

How does one balance the duty of trying to abuse the mentally ill with society's attitude at large, which is mostly tolerant and sympathetic?

 

[Special K]

Why all the hate for Pap?? There is so much hate that any "normal" person would start to wonder why....

 

I don't think I have seen any "hate" towards Pap. Far too strong a word, bandied about without any real justification, in my view. Exasperation, maybe . Hang on, though, I may have called him a f..kwit or similar in the past, but that doesn't mean I "hate" him.

 

However, i have seen what could be considered hate on this forum, directed mainly at Glasgow Saint, Hypo, Delldays, Fry, Turkish and a few others. You might want to start with them in the first instance if you want an example.

[aintforever]

Nah, I agree. Just informed.

 

I quite like the way you combine accusations of mental illness with sustained insults. I mean, if you all believe I'm genuinely mentally ill, then it does lead one to some interesting questions. How does it work in real life, for example? Do you all phone each other up and head down to the DOP? Find someone with mental illness and then let rip? What about ad-hoc opportunities, like when you see mentally ill people out and about in town?

 

How does one balance the duty of trying to abuse the mentally ill with society's attitude at large, which is mostly tolerant and sympathetic?

 

 

I think we're all a little bit mental to a degree, don't think you're anything special. Just because you're nuts doesn't mean you are ill.

[sadoldgit]

Whatever you think of conspiracy theories and theorists, it is good that people don't automatically accept what they are fed and ask questions. There are issues over the McCann case that haven't been satisfactory addressed and those should be the issue rather than attacking fellow posters. Like many I guess, I have dipped in and out of the news items of this case over the years. From the early days I had my doubts about the validity of the McCanns accounts so yes, I have an agenda and will seek out items that reinforce my position. I found the Hall films helpful because I hadnt seen the "crime scene" before and wasnt aware of many of the conflicting statements made by the McCanns and the Tapas 7. Maybe they are kosher,maybe they are not. But it bothers me that they seem to be playing fast and loose with the truth (for whatever reason). It doesnt hurt to keep an open mind and I fully accept that my view of the McCanns could be wrong. But until there is a definite conclusion about what happened to Madeleine I do believe that there is still enough uncertainty around the McCanns not to let them off the hook.

[pap]

I think we're all a little bit mental to a degree, don't think you're anything special. Just because you're nuts doesn't mean you are ill.

 

I see. Some of your friends don't make the distinction. Tim is even capable of making remote diagnoses. He's suggested that I'm mentally ill or have a cognitive disorder several times.

 

So if someone is diagnosed with a mental illness, then they're off limits. But if they're not diagnosed, and simply disagree with you, then they're nuts and fair game?

 

I'm just trying to understand the mechanics of your operation here. I'm fairly capable at most tasks, but I feel that this is delicate work and would like to know more about the rough and tumble of ganging up with a load of similarly prejudiced mates and abusing the potentially mentally ill on account of them thinking different things.

 

Please share. Most of us are getting too old to recall our first-hand playground experiences.

[buctootim]

I see. Some of your friends don't make the distinction. Tim is even capable of making remote diagnoses. He's suggested that I'm mentally ill or have a cognitive disorder several times.

 

So if someone is diagnosed with a mental illness, then they're off limits. But if they're not diagnosed, and simply disagree with you, then they're nuts and fair game?

 

I'm just trying to understand the mechanics of your operation here. I'm fairly capable at most tasks, but I feel that this is delicate work and would like to know more about the rough and tumble of ganging up with a load of similarly prejudiced mates and abusing the potentially mentally ill on account of them thinking different things.

 

Please share. Most of us are getting too old to recall our first-hand playground experiences.

 

Another failure to understand what has been said.

[notnowcato]

I don't think I have seen any "hate" towards Pap. Far too strong a word, bandied about without any real justification, in my view. Exasperation, maybe . Hang on, though, I may have called him a f..kwit or similar in the past, but that doesn't mean I "hate" him.

 

However, i have seen what could be considered hate on this forum, directed mainly at Glasgow Saint, Hypo, Delldays, Fry, Turkish and a few others. You might want to start with them in the first instance if you want an example.

 

Nah, they're all complete nutjobs.

[pap]

Another failure to understand what has been said.

 

Is it? Here's the maths.

 

1) You persistently accuse someone of having a mental illness.

2) You persistently attempt to insult the person you accuse of having a mental illness.

 

Something in this equation doesn't hold. There has to be another variable.

 

Either your ongoing charges are entirely false or you think it's cool to abuse mentally ill people. Which is it?

[Special K]

Whatever you think of conspiracy theories and theorists, it is good that people don't automatically accept what they are fed and ask questions. There are issues over the McCann case that haven't been satisfactory addressed and those should be the issue rather than attacking fellow posters. Like many I guess, I have dipped in and out of the news items of this case over the years. From the early days I had my doubts about the validity of the McCanns accounts so yes, I have an agenda and will seek out items that reinforce my position. I found the Hall films helpful because I hadnt seen the "crime scene" before and wasnt aware of many of the conflicting statements made by the McCanns and the Tapas 7. Maybe they are kosher,maybe they are not. But it bothers me that they seem to be playing fast and loose with the truth (for whatever reason). It doesnt hurt to keep an open mind and I fully accept that my view of the McCanns could be wrong. But until there is a definite conclusion about what happened to Madeleine I do believe that there is still enough uncertainty around the McCanns not to let them off the hook.

 

On the wider point of acceptance of what is "fed" there is a million miles between the superb investigative work of, say, the likes of Pilger and Foot to the BS paraded around by internet based crackpots and fools, paraded as "evidence". Trouble is, the latter tries to jump on the shirttails of the former without ever becoming even remotely close to exercising the same level of prowess, respect, dignity and sheer brilliance.

 

As for your points about the McCanns, you say you have an "open mind" and then say they shouldn't be "let off the hook" in the very next sentence! Crikey! If that isn't charged, tried and convicted in one go, i don't know what it. And don't you think this exercise in pre-judgement is far more damaging than referring to another poster on a football forum as delusional? If not, then I would suggest you have a serious word with yourself in the corner of the room.

[Bearsy]

Is it? Here's the maths.

 

1) You persistently accuse someone of having a mental illness.

2) You persistently attempt to insult the person you accuse of having a mental illness.

 

Something in this equation doesn't hold. There has to be another variable.

 

Either your ongoing charges are entirely false or you think it's cool to abuse mentally ill people. Which is it?

 

I imagine he was trying to insult you, pap.

[buctootim]

Is it? Here's the maths.

 

1) You persistently accuse someone of having a mental illness.

2) You persistently attempt to insult the person you accuse of having a mental illness.

 

Something in this equation doesn't hold. There has to be another variable.

 

Either your ongoing charges are entirely false or you think it's cool to abuse mentally ill people. Which is it?

 

I've never said you had a mental illness, Ive said you have a cognitive disorder in processing information. The failure to understand the difference only makes it more likely Im right. Its either that or you're deliberately malevolent. Only you know the answer.

[buctootim]

On the wider point of acceptance of what is "fed" there is a million miles between the superb investigative work of, say, the likes of Pilger and Foot to the BS paraded around by internet based crackpots and fools, paraded as "evidence". Trouble is, the latter tries to jump on the shirttails of the former without ever becoming even remotely close to exercising the same level of prowess, respect, dignity and sheer brilliance.

 

Quite,. Investigative journalists hold government to account and contribute a great service to society. Perversely the conspiracist's fruitloop noise actually aids government by making legitimate concerns and criticism look like part of the same continuum

[pap]

I've never said you had a mental illness, Ive said you have a cognitive disorder in processing information. The failure to understand the difference only makes it more likely Im right. Its either that or you're deliberately malevolent. Only you know the answer.

 

Google and frequency undo you, my good man. Not that I can be arsed searching it out, but feel free to find your bile and regurgitate it.

[buctootim]

Google and frequency undo you, my good man. Not that I can be arsed searching it out, but feel free to find your bile and regurgitate it.

 

So no substance to your claim then? Par for course.

[Halo Stickman]

An interesting passage from The Believing Brain by Michael Shermer (a well known Skeptic, ref link below)

 

Most people, most of the time, arrive at their beliefs for a host of reasons involving personality and temperament, family dynamics and cultural background, parents and siblings, peer groups and teachers, education and books, mentors and heroes, and various life experiences, very few of which have anything at all to do with intelligence*. The Enlightenment ideal of Homo rationalis has us sitting down before a table of facts, weighing them in the balance pro and con, and then employing logic and reason to determine which set of facts best supports this or that theory. This is not at all how we form beliefs. What happens is that the facts of the world are filtered by our brains through the coloured lenses of worldviews, paradigms, theories, hypotheses, conjectures, hunches, biases, and prejudices we have accumulated through living. We then sort through the facts and select those that confirm what we already believe and ignore or rationalize away those that contradict our beliefs.

 

* Personally, I would be happy to add “or mental illness” here.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Shermer

[hypochondriac]

Seems to be an awful lot of people employed by the government on here to discredit pap. Funny that.

[aintforever]

Is it? Here's the maths.

 

1) You persistently accuse someone of having a mental illness.

2) You persistently attempt to insult the person you accuse of having a mental illness.

 

Something in this equation doesn't hold. There has to be another variable.

 

Either your ongoing charges are entirely false or you think it's cool to abuse mentally ill people. Which is it?

 

Just because you're mental doesn't mean you you're not a ****-head.

[Scummer]

Seems to be an awful lot of people employed by the government on here to discredit pap. Funny that.

 

I can believe that there are people in the world who put things on the internet in order to discredit people, and that they might be getting paid by governments to do so. However, the idea that they have chosen saintsweb as their battleground is hilarious.

[hypochondriac]

I can believe that there are people in the world who put things on the internet in order to discredit people, and that they might be getting paid by governments to do so. However, the idea that they have chosen saintsweb as their battleground is hilarious.

 

It's the last place you would suspect. It's genius.

[pap]

I can believe that there are people in the world who put things on the internet in order to discredit people, and that they might be getting paid by governments to do so. However, the idea that they have chosen saintsweb as their battleground is hilarious.

 

It's the last place you would suspect. It's genius.

 

Yeah, it's only likely to be visited by people interested in a popular football club that now plays in some obscure league. Premier, I think they call it

[sadoldgit]

On the wider point of acceptance of what is "fed" there is a million miles between the superb investigative work of, say, the likes of Pilger and Foot to the BS paraded around by internet based crackpots and fools, paraded as "evidence". Trouble is, the latter tries to jump on the shirttails of the former without ever becoming even remotely close to exercising the same level of prowess, respect, dignity and sheer brilliance.

 

As for your points about the McCanns, you say you have an "open mind" and then say they shouldn't be "let off the hook" in the very next sentence! Crikey! If that isn't charged, tried and convicted in one go, i don't know what it. And don't you think this exercise in pre-judgement is far more damaging than referring to another poster on a football forum as delusional? If not, then I would suggest you have a serious word with yourself in the corner of the room.

 

There are many people looking into the McCann case who are anything but "internet crackpots and fools."

As for the let off the hook remark, they are,at the very least, guilty of child neglect surely?

[hutch]

As for the let off the hook remark, they are,at the very least, guilty of child neglect surely?

Not, apparently, in the UK. When was the last time either of them set foot in Portugal?

[CB Fry]

There are many people looking into the McCann case who are anything but "internet crackpots and fools."

As for the let off the hook remark, they are,at the very least, guilty of child neglect surely?

 

Clearly they aren't going to be charged our judged guilty of child neglect now, regardless of anyone's personal opinion.

 

If that is your primary beef with the McCanns then there is no need for you to watch four hour videos or ramble on about utterly irrelevant cadaver dog "evidence".

 

Let us know which non-crackpots are "looking into" the McCanns, excluding the police operation that the McCanns won't let stop of course.

[aintforever]

There are many people looking into the McCann case who are anything but "internet crackpots and fools."

As for the let off the hook remark, they are,at the very least, guilty of child neglect surely?

 

If you could look at the evidence and come up with one possible timeline of events where they killed her and disposed of the body I might consider it, it's what anyone seriously investigating the case would do.

 

Them killing their own daughter is a far fetched idea in itself, let alone making the body vanish in such a small time and put on such a good act covering it up. Even if the tapas 7 were in on it (gone from far-fetched to pure Hollywood with that idea) Gerry or Kate would only have a 2.5 hour window to kill her and dispose of the body, without a car, in a foreign country and at a busy holiday resort.

[Verbal]

Not, apparently, in the UK. When was the last time either of them set foot in Portugal?

 

June 2014, when they arrived in Lisbon to appear in their £1 million libel action against Goncalo Amaral. Amaral sacked his lawyers on the morning of the hearing - a common delaying tactic.

[pap]

If you could look at the evidence and come up with one possible timeline of events where they killed her and disposed of the body I might consider it, it's what anyone seriously investigating the case would do.

 

Them killing their own daughter is a far fetched idea in itself, let alone making the body vanish in such a small time and put on such a good act covering it up. Even if the tapas 7 were in on it (gone from far-fetched to pure Hollywood with that idea) Gerry or Kate would only have a 2.5 hour window to kill her and dispose of the body, without a car, in a foreign country and at a busy holiday resort.

 

I've just phoned the office and told them I can't do any work today. I simply explained that I was going to spend hours of my time putting together a complete timeline and solution to a case which the UK taxpayer has already spent a fruitless 10 million, all for the benefit of a web designer that doesn't want to know anyway.

 

I urge others to make a similar commitment.

[notnowcato]

I've just phoned the office and told them I can't do any work today. I simply explained that I was going to spend hours of my time putting together a complete timeline and solution to a case which the UK taxpayer has already spent a fruitless 10 million, all for the benefit of a web designer that doesn't want to know anyway.

 

I urge others to make a similar commitment.

 

I was just about to but all this talk of Tapas has sidetracked me..

[hutch]

I've just phoned the office and told them I can't do any work today. I simply explained that I was going to spend hours of my time putting together a complete timeline and solution to a case which the UK taxpayer has already spent a fruitless 10 million, all for the benefit of a web designer that doesn't want to know anyway.

 

I urge others to make a similar commitment.

I'd love to mate, but I'm too busy watching Oscar.

[sadoldgit]

Clearly they aren't going to be charged our judged guilty of child neglect now, regardless of anyone's personal opinion.

 

If that is your primary beef with the McCanns then there is no need for you to watch four hour videos or ramble on about utterly irrelevant cadaver dog "evidence".

 

Let us know which non-crackpots are "looking into" the McCanns, excluding the police operation that the McCanns won't let stop of course.

 

You are probably right and they could well not get charged with child neglect. IMHO they should have been,

No one has to watch the four hours of film but I found it interesting and it helped fill a lot of gaps in what I had picked up so far.

Considering that the dog evidence has been spot on in 200 cases I would say it was utterly irrelevant, There were of course attempts to discredit this evidence but if you look outside this case to see how this works you might be more respectful of police dogs.

I really do not have time to get names of investigators and why should I. You believe they are all nutters and nothing I will say will prove otherwise. However this isnt rocket science and many people have picked up on the discrepencies in the McCanns stories.

Why should the McCanns let the police investigation stop? As long as it goes on the money comes into their fund and some people believe they MUST be guiltless. As Geery says, she us the body. He knows as long as they dont find the body they are ok.

They seem to have convinced you which makes me wonder if you have children of your own? Fours days after Madeleine went missing Gerry McCann was seen "laughing his head off." Apparently neither of her parents have ever, including the night she went missing, looked for Maddie themselves. There are many, many other recorded accounts of their behaviour which does not add up with the behaviour of parents how have lost a young child. How would you react?

[sadoldgit]

If you could look at the evidence and come up with one possible timeline of events where they killed her and disposed of the body I might consider it, it's what anyone seriously investigating the case would do.

 

Them killing their own daughter is a far fetched idea in itself, let alone making the body vanish in such a small time and put on such a good act covering it up. Even if the tapas 7 were in on it (gone from far-fetched to pure Hollywood with that idea) Gerry or Kate would only have a 2.5 hour window to kill her and dispose of the body, without a car, in a foreign country and at a busy holiday resort.

 

The timeline is clearly an issue and not nailed on so I am not sure why you are so hung up on it. The original investigator clearly thought it was possible. Is it so far fetched? They clearly were not bothered that much about their children's wellbeing as they left them alone every night. They werent short of a few bob and child care was easy enough. Kate said she didnt want to leave them with "strangers" so preferred to leave them alone! These stangers would have been the same strangers who looked after the children in the creche when they were left during the day. Apparently traces of sedative were found in Madeleine's hair found in her brush. Is it not possible that they gave the children a sedative whilst they went out and something went wrong? The body could have been put anywhere short term and then moved later. A police investigtor has suggested that burial in a shallow grave in sand in a dry atmosphere helps the body to mummify. The fluids drain and the smell of the corpse reduces. They did have a car days later and the police dogs foun evidence of blood and cadaver smells that matched Maddie's DNA.

 

Talking about probablities. What are the chances of a paedo walking up to an appartment, finding it unlocked, walking in and finding no one at home apart from three small children and walking out with the biggest? Given the Tapas 9 were out every night it is more possible that someone could have been aware that the children were left alone and planned it - but then they would have had to be around for a while whilst planning it all but at some point you would think that they would have aroused some suspicion and would ahve become a suspect early on. Even so there was no signed of a forced entry, no sign of anyone else being in the apartment. Kate was adamant that the window was used but on her print was found on the window. Have you seen the window? It is nt very big and the chances of an adult getting in or out with a small child is very small. The bedroom did not match Kate's account of what happened and looks very much like the furniture was rearranged. Curtains that were billowing in the breeze from the open window were now behind a bed and a chair etc. The McCann's didn't have time to look for their child but they found the time to delete many messages on their mobiles. They were heartbroken but found time to fly off to see the Pope, leaving the twins in the same place where their other child had been "abducted." Kate is quoted as saying if Maddy had of hurt herself when they were out, how was that their fault (WTF?). There is tons of this stuff and that is my problems with this case. There is so much that doesnt add up with what the McCanns would have us believe. You say that they have done a good job in covering it up but that is the point. If she was dead then all they have done that can be described as a good job is disposing of the body. Everything else is a bodge.

 

They have convinced some people of their innocence and others believe that they have not told the whole truth. I wonder if this split has anything to do with those with young children and those without?

[CB Fry]

You are probably right and they could well not get charged with child neglect. IMHO they should have been,

No one has to watch the four hours of film but I found it interesting and it helped fill a lot of gaps in what I had picked up so far.

Considering that the dog evidence has been spot on in 200 cases I would say it was utterly irrelevant, There were of course attempts to discredit this evidence but if you look outside this case to see how this works you might be more respectful of police dogs.

I really do not have time to get names of investigators and why should I. You believe they are all nutters and nothing I will say will prove otherwise. However this isnt rocket science and many people have picked up on the discrepencies in the McCanns stories.

Why should the McCanns let the police investigation stop? As long as it goes on the money comes into their fund and some people believe they MUST be guiltless. As Geery says, she us the body. He knows as long as they dont find the body they are ok.

They seem to have convinced you which makes me wonder if you have children of your own? Fours days after Madeleine went missing Gerry McCann was seen "laughing his head off." Apparently neither of her parents have ever, including the night she went missing, looked for Maddie themselves. There are many, many other recorded accounts of their behaviour which does not add up with the behaviour of parents how have lost a young child. How would you react?

 

I don't need to discredit the dog evidence. It's been seen by anyone of importance investigating the case. You make it sound like only four hour video man and the Internet fruitcakes have seen the dog evidence.

 

All that is happening is people who know eff all about cadaver dog evidence deciding they do know and "something doesn't add up". Well, it does. You might want to be "more respectful" of dog evidence and the police yourself instead of lecturing me. The person not respecting people is you sunshine not me. You're the one slinging unfounded allegations about. Or, as I know them, lies.

 

And your response to a request to give me someone not-mental investigating the McCanns is to give me nothing. So no one despite you saying there were "lots". More lies then. I accept your apology.

 

And the coup de gras, wheel out the "you don't have kids" routine. More accusations built on a p iss weak grasp of reality.

 

Lastly the "seen laughing their head off" stuff is total, utter, Internet conspiracy idiot nonsense. It is a lie. Don't tell me to effing "respect police dogs" when you peddle that horseshi it.

 

 

Fair play SOG, you are a natural conspiro-idiot. An absolute natural.

[pap]

And the coup de gras, wheel out the "you don't have kids" routine. More accusations built on a p iss weak grasp of reality.

 

And yet, people keep asking the question.

 

It's probably that whole lack of empathy thing. Most people are cured when they have small ones to look after.

[CB Fry]

And yet, people keep asking the question.

 

It's probably that whole lack of empathy thing. Most people are cured when they have small ones to look after.

Which one of us doesn't have empathy again?

 

Is it the one of us happy to accuse the people tried to help a dying man in the street "crisis actors"? Is it that guy? I think it's that guy.

[pap]

Which one of us doesn't have empathy again?

 

Is it the one of us happy to accuse the people tried to help a dying man in the street "crisis actors"? Is it that guy? I think it's that guy.

 

Nah, it's the one that has the demons running around his head, acts like an utter c**t to anyone that disagrees with him and admits that he would put his own liberty above the safety of his hypothetically missing child.

 

That'll be the one.

[aintforever]

I've just phoned the office and told them I can't do any work today. I simply explained that I was going to spend hours of my time putting together a complete timeline and solution to a case which the UK taxpayer has already spent a fruitless 10 million, all for the benefit of a web designer that doesn't want to know anyway.

 

I urge others to make a similar commitment.

 

I'm not a web-designer, you are just plain wrong about everything aren't you?

 

It's not hard to come up with a possible version of events, it's just proving who did it that's hard. For example I think there are two scenarios that are most likely.

 

Either a planned kidnapping by someone with links to the resort:

 

7.30pm McCanns put Madeline to bed

 

8.30pm They abandon her to go and get ****ed and stuff their faces with tapas as they have done routinely during their holiday.

 

Sometime between 8.30pm and 10pm, a person or persons who has observed the fact they they leave their kids alone every evening, abducts her, puts her in their car and leaves the area.

 

Or an opportunist abduction by a pervert:

 

7.30pm McCanns put Madeline to bed

 

8.30pm They abandon her to go and get ****ed and stuff their faces with tapas as they have done routinely during their holiday.

 

Sometime between 8.30pm and 10pm, Madeline wakes and goes looking for her Mum and Dad, either manages to get out of the apartment and get abducted by a lone nonce or makes the fact that she is alone obvious and is abducted by nonce.

 

This is of course only speculation based on what info is available online, only the Police will have all the necessary facts.

 

See it's not hard, feel free to contribute your possible timeline...

[CB Fry]

Nah, it's the one that has the demons running around his head, acts like an utter c**t to anyone that disagrees with him and admits that he would put his own liberty above the safety of his hypothetically missing child.

 

That'll be the one.

Laughable stuff from the forums biggest clown.

 

I am not addressing people that disagree with me, I'm addressing people that are wrong and/or are simply lying. Lee Rigby was not a set up and there were no crisis actors. That is not an opinion, only fu cking idiots think it is. Like you.

 

Likewise Gerry McCann "laughing his head off". Not an opinion. Just a lie. Spread by fu cking idiots. Like you.

 

And God knows what you are blathering about with that hypothetical situation, or what is based on. Let's file it with the rest of your fu cking idiocy shall we?

 

But yeah, I got the demons I have. Oh yeah. You've got me there. Me. Old demon chops. That's like, so me.

 

Anyway, tell us about the Boston Bomb again.

[pap]

Laughable stuff from the forums biggest clown.

 

I am not addressing people that disagree with me, I'm addressing people that are wrong and/or are simply lying. Lee Rigby was not a set up and there were no crisis actors. That is not an opinion, only fu cking idiots think it is. Like you.

 

Likewise Gerry McCann "laughing his head off". Not an opinion. Just a lie. Spread by fu cking idiots. Like you.

 

And God knows what you are blathering about with that hypothetical situation, or what is based on. Let's file it with the rest of your fu cking idiocy shall we?

 

But yeah, I got the demons I have. Oh yeah. You've got me there. Me. Old demon chops. That's like, so me.

 

Anyway, tell us about the Boston Bomb again.

 

Ah, look. "Me me me" CB Fry is doing the angry thing again. It's cute.

 

As a bonus, check out its parenting priorities.

 

As a parent, if I was being accused of being involved in my own daughters abduction and/or death, I would take legal advice and if that advice told me to not answer questions I would do just that.

 

Let's see that again, shall we.

 

As a parent, if I was being accused of being involved in my own daughters abduction and/or death, I would take legal advice and if that advice told me to not answer questions I would do just that.

 

And it wonders why people accuse it of a lack of empathy.

[CB Fry]

Ah, look. "Me me me" CB Fry is doing the angry thing again. It's cute.

 

As a bonus, check out its parenting priorities.

 

 

 

Let's see that again, shall we.

 

 

 

And it wonders why people accuse it of a lack of empathy.

 

 

 

Dear me.

 

Being that your question that prompted that response, and your interpretation of my answer is completely wrapped up in your misguided conspiracy theories about the McCanns then god knows why you are using that against me.

 

Apart from the fact that is serves my purpose of showing you up as a complete fool.

 

What Kate McCann did was successfully protect her innocence so she could continue the search for her child. You are completely unable to put yourself in her shoes because you see the world through the eyes of a four-hour video maker who thinks it is libel to say 7/7 wasn't faked.

 

I would happily say I would do what she did, but for the reasons she did it, not the reasons you in your warped tiny mind think she did it.

 

Quote that quote up twice more, ten times more. I will stand by that all freaking day.

[aintforever]

The body could have been put anywhere short term and then moved later. A police investigtor has suggested that burial in a shallow grave in sand in a dry atmosphere helps the body to mummify. The fluids drain and the smell of the corpse reduces.

 

Have you got a link to this?

 

It would be interesting to know how the McCanns concealed the body in a shallow grave for days, within walking distance when the area was search by hundreds of people and police with dogs.

 

Also how do you suppose they dug the grave? Either they used their bare hands, took a shovel with them on holiday or there was a 24hr B&Q within walking distance.

[pap]

Dear me.

 

Being that your question that prompted that response, and your interpretation of my answer is completely wrapped up in your misguided conspiracy theories about the McCanns then god knows why you are using that against me.

 

Apart from the fact that is serves my purpose of showing you up as a complete fool.

 

What Kate McCann did was successfully protect her innocence so she could continue the search for her child. You are completely unable to put yourself in her shoes because you see the world through the eyes of a four-hour video maker who thinks it is libel to say 7/7 wasn't faked.

 

I would happily say I would do what she did, but for the reasons she did it, not the reasons you in your warped tiny mind think she did it.

 

Quote that quote up twice more, ten times more. I will stand by that all freaking day.

 

One to show the kids, eh Dad?

[CB Fry]

One to show the kids, eh Dad?

 

I think you have done this gag several times, to several contributors. I doesn't really work, because we all know which of us all values internet forums the most, don't we?

 

There's some "great resources" out there, there really is.

 

I just hope you keep your Boston Bomb/Lee Rigby nonsense away from your children.

[pap]

I think you have done this gag several times, to several contributors. I doesn't really work, because we all know which of us all values internet forums the most, don't we?

 

There's some "great resources" out there, there really is.

 

I just hope you keep your Boston Bomb/Lee Rigby nonsense away from your children.

 

Sit 'em on your knee, and carefully explain that if something ever happens to them, and it's a choice between you and them, Daddy wins.