A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Reference Forum for all information regarding translations and PT Law etc and other useful information.

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Respect4Kids » Tue May 20, 2008 11:19 am

beaker1 wrote:whoever said they were magali wins first prize :wink:
edit don't want to make you paranoid magali about how i know, but the thing to remember is if you want to remain anonomous don't use the same PB account.

http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:9p ... cd=1&gl=uk





Ooooh! Beaker1 you have a side that impresses me.I was wondering who would be the 1st one to properly investigate this ,tada, 'deep mystery matter'.Not bad ,not bad at all! :shock: for you.With all that wine in pints that you keep mentioning you' ve well proven us that your brain is working wonders - but keeping advertising for alcohol isn't good imo,it still affects moods and best is keeping this for yourself, :wink: . And also, that there is always an element that can lead to the truth.

Apart from this I haven't said I wanted "to remain "anonomous" ", (in your words) :) and you haven't made me "paranoid" one bit. And no-way I would have changed my photobucks account,for first I'm not an arguida so I have nothing to hide at all, and all my Maddy-pics are there. Last night I read all this and got a good needed laugh,in that topic that saddens me, with a thought for you actually, for your speed and initiative!
--But, question for you, who are you? I don't clearly remember a "beaker1"...


So Hello Back to my e-Friends. I have missed you and been reading the 3A at times.

I don't agree with the edited image on:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13114&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=390

It is too much brightened and not a proof at all that the Girl wasn't wearing make-up, since I have proved it using more lightness too.

Beside once you anti-pics squad decided that too much brightness was fading the coloboma away and making it disappear...so make your minds up : it can't work both ways.If a specific edition process is going to make the make-up disappear it WILL be the same process for the coloboma, won't it.
A bit of logics in the matter a day takes the bias and the injustices away!

Not staying now but, Take Care Friends, very nice to discuss with you again.

XXXMag

Magali

And to spell it out:

M
a
g
a
l
i

___________________________M_______A_______G_________________________________
User avatar
Respect4Kids
New In Town
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:08 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby gestalt » Tue May 20, 2008 11:55 am

Respect4Kids wrote:... I haven't said I wanted "to remain "anonomous" ", (in your words) :)


Magali with your style, subject matter, and conversation you couldn't be more obvious if you started your posts with extra large flashing neon letters, a seizure inducing avatar and a earsplitting fanfare. Are you going to 'fess up about your other persona's as well?
User avatar
gestalt
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:17 am
Location: the real world

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby bonnybraes1 » Tue May 20, 2008 11:59 am

This might be a very good time to remind posters of the last photo thread - if there is any signs of a repeat performance, this one will go the same way.
Please bear that in mind.
bonnybraes1
Moderator
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 7:46 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Mel » Tue May 20, 2008 12:07 pm

Betty wrote:Can I just say that I posted on the original thread that Mel posted and I have respect for her, as even though a few of us disagreed that there was anything amiss about the photo, or any of the others that were posted later on, she was very gracious in her debate and did not resort to name calling, unlike others..

However, I think that this photo looks more in context (re the arm) now that we have seen the full pic. I dont think a big ice cream cone ness makes for a falic symbol. Neither do I think you can say for sure that Maddie is wearing make up. In the last pic posted the sat/hue has been reduced, and yes from that it does look like she has make up on.

But, it is not the original image that has had the colour/contrast reduced. It is an image of an image. From this you cannot get an accurate view of the pic. If you had the original and chenged the colour, and it still looked that way, thn I would agree that it looks as though Maddie has been made up.

As it is, it is too distorted to tell.

I can fully see why there are concerns, but I think they have been overpplayed.

PS - Beaker and Mel, For the record, I wish I was a hardened drinker - but I dont really touch the stuff!!!! Any longer on here though, and I may be. :D (Hic)


Thanks for that Betty, I have always said I don't know why people cannot disagree graciously!

The drink was only a joke, no offence meant, only have a few myself at the weekends but like you who knows if on here long :lol: enough :lol: :lol:
Mel
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Mel » Tue May 20, 2008 12:12 pm

sans_souci wrote:This forum is full of the most amazing coincidences. Really extraordinary.

What are the chances that, following the (very sensible) locking of the original thread by bjr, a new thread is opened by a brand new, very very recently registered poster by the name of "respect4kids" praising Mel for her investigative thread and for standing up to all the bullies.

And then, by happenstance, Mel comes along 10 mintes later to thank "respect4kids" for her kind words. Extraordinary.

A more suspicious mind than mine may think that respect4kids and mel are quite closely connected............


& you criticise me for being suspicious of pics that are totally inappropriate of an "abducted" child!
I AM NOT RESPECT4KIDS I can assure you, have the mods check it out i am sure they can find same isps!
However, I do have respect for kids & would never ever have pics of my daughter circulating the internet EDITTED By ADMIN
Last edited by bonnybraes1 on Tue May 20, 2008 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: If this thread goes down the same unsavoury route as previous threads, it will be locked.
Mel
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Mel » Tue May 20, 2008 12:21 pm

gestalt wrote:
Betty wrote:Can I just say that I posted on the original thread that Mel posted and I have respect for her, as even though a few of us disagreed that there was anything amiss about the photo, or any of the others that were posted later on, she was very gracious in her debate and did not resort to name calling, unlike others..


I was addressing the OP and a reply to the above message will serve the same purpose to illustrate to the day shift what occured last night pointing to one relevant page http://3as.madeleinemccann.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13114&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=gestalt&start=322 where I came in and started to take apart mel's little game before Cynical_tourist delivered the killer blow by showing a different video frame grab of the same image.

I politely posted my observation about the image, this "gracious" poster dismissed and insulted me for daring to question the OP, a further seemingly "partner in crime" was more abusive and both suggested I was calling them, or insinuating that they were paedophiles. I has asked them to indicate where I did this but have not received this or an apology to me and others, despite several requests. The last time I asked for this the thread was closed, perhaps bjr thought that I was pushing to hard for a reply

mel wrote:It is vigilant people like us that family members don't have to worry about! We don't put our kids at risk either by leaving them alone in an unlocked apartment in a foreign country while we go get p***** nor do we post pics of them half naked in pools for the whole world to see!

Can only a few people here see that it is physical impossibilty for the arm holding the ice cream to be Madeleines from the angle that the real arm would bend at?
Ok perhaps I am too mathematically minded or just too b****y logical for people like you! But then that's why my kids are with me now & not "abducted" & in some far off place giving the abductors "their tuppence worth" or "being treated like a princess"

It is enough that I treated my kids like royalty as they deserved & I didn't abandon them & leave them to their fate, nor did I ever lose my temper & break one of their necks leaving blood spatter all over an apartment! So don't b****y talk to me about taking a look at myself, tell that to the McCanns!

sparticus wrote:If the photo strikes you as entirely innocent ... so much so, that the very suggestion that other posters don't like it, makes you feel 'sick' ... why did you cut it in half like that ?

I don't ask you that question because you're a 'pro' or because almost every one of your posts have been made on photo related threads ... but just because if you find the photo so non-comment worthy, why did you go to the trouble of changing it ?

My own thoughts are

Here are the parents of a little girl who, they would have us believe, is in the hands of a predatory paedophile. They're asked to find some photos to release to the press ... so they sit there sifting through the family snaps and say, " ooh, how about this one where she's holding an over sized phallic symbol ?"

What the f*** is wrong with these people ?


sparticus wrote:
gestalt wrote:I might ask the same of you, I find your imagery utterly repugnant. Do you really look at a child holding an ice cream in this way? Do you really believe that even parents as irresponsible and careless as the McCann's could stretch to poor quality, vague insinuations in some attempt to indicate abduction for sexual purposes by using a image that a tiny few others find "provocative". If I were a close family member to some of the posters on this thread tonight I'd be seriously worried. It's not showing any special powers of investigation, nor is it facing some projected view of reality, it's aberrant behavior and individuals should really take a look at themselves. I hope this does not descend further and bjr then has to carve up the thread like the last time individuals went down this avenue.

... and here it comes ... the inevitable 'you must be some kind of perve' attack ( and you say you're not a pro ? :roll: )

Well you can f*** off with that kind of boll*x when you like !

I don't like that photo ... and that's that

How F*****G dare you !


mel wrote:Mel
What kind of an idiot are you that cannot work our that is not Madeleine's arm? & yes it takes logic to work out that the arm I see coming down from her shoulder could not physically bend & come back at that angle! Synchronise your brain with your mouth please!

& when I am splashed all over the media after having treated my kid like the McCanns treated Madeleine you can then raise questions as to my integrity until then keep your lurid slurs for someone who deserves them! I do not use bad language on boards but take a look back at Spartacus's post & DITTO!


If You didn't make accusations of us being "questionable" then what is this taken from above?
"If I were a close family member to some of the posters on this thread tonight I'd be seriously worried"
You made other comments about my thinking reflecting on me also, sorry i don't know how to quote from one thread to another!

Yes I was mad at you & called you an idiot & I apologise for that. For you inferring that I was a perv I have yet to receive an apology!

& there was no "little game" so you are no big hero! I saw a picture the only one circulating at the time which appeared to have a severed arm, someone else corrected me & I accepted that, I am not infallible yet you go on & on about my little game!
There was a mannerly debate going on in the thread you & a few made it ugly & are trying to do the same here!

FYI! regardless of the now joined arm I think the pic has still been photoshopped & the purpose of the monster ice cream & the lollipop clearly shown by respect4kids on page 2 disturbs me even more!
Mel
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Respect4Kids » Tue May 20, 2008 12:26 pm

sans_souci wrote:Oy you bu&&ers. Scoundrels. Plagarists the lot of you!! I mentioned Magali first on the other thread.

And don't give me the old "well, that was before the game started" rubbish!

:D :D :D



Aaah but I was ONLY READING Mel's thread, I re-registered towards the end of it and when I went to post in support of her/his intelligence it had already gone "wooshed", so here you go, the "palm" belongs to Beaker1, no cheating! (and that's no reason to celebrate with "pints of wine"-ah ah)

Note : [Mel's thread] the SAME patterns of SOME to get the threads locked.Patterns , mmh I deduct some reasons behind those patterns, and thanx to Mel it has become obvious now.My ex-sticky "Maddy's strange growth ...and copyrights2006!", now locked due to the continuous aggression of GESTALT & co, the herbs growing man,(fact- website that he advertised himself on his "last" 'last photo' thread, 22 posts,and not on PMs to me , in opposition to his previous LIE on my former thread) has gathered numerous posts and sub-topics,which can be "helpful" in various angles to view the case, well I hope, it seems to be since nearly 10,000 people have viewed parts of it.

I don't think that their aim is to protect the Child since what we saw in the end of "Maddy's strange growth...and copyrights2006" in "Reference Forum & Investigations", here on the 3A, bad taste animations of Maddy's mouth by Gestalt.

Back to topic please.

Mel, I will PM you shortly.xx

What I see here on this newly released pic is a "Maddy" whose FRINGE has GROWN, yes, here we go again.
Her arm is bigger than on the "last photo" pool-rim.
Her face looks more mature (and that's not through the make-up, I'm talking bone-cheeks etc)
She's indeed very advanced for a nearly 4 years old to hold this giant ice-cream cone without a problem (that's if we take it from what they want to show us and accept it's her arm--mind you, since the size & shape of fingers it seems to be hers) or at least was told to hold the cone that way for the photo, and the lolli this way, which is what bothers me deeply.It would worry me even out of context but with the "paedophile-scare" over her it's the 'last step to JAIL--> THIS WAY' imo.Of course Kate & G would have thought of withdrawing this from the shelf before the TV program but NO, they WANTED it so, so it's obviously deliberate, once again,and WHY?
It seems her hair has turned browner ...(with reserve)

She has that "Spanish" "new look" & attitude that causes me a problem of...wondering about my sight, off to optician, see you back soon.I might get to Huelva and back, need to see a few things for myself...

0-0

(that's a pair of spectacles)

p.s I'm trying to post same size photos as previously seen on this site but it's "too big" they say.I want to see comparisons, to show what I mean with her arm, face, fringe.

The MC might be provocating once -too much this time, maybe in hope to sue people BUT they may get more than what they have bargained for on this one.Beside I get the clear impression they avoid court and a few "by the way" questions...

p.s II If you need photos you can directly copy them from Vancouver1's in progress photo thread sticky in Reference forum (copy image location) and restitute/paste them here with the "Image" facility. You need to select them and keep them in mouse before you start your post. Many greetings, :D

p.s III Just ignore the rude paid posters, they're here BECAUSE the MC don't want a few things to be seen. If we play their game we'd have to start all over again, and same for this forum if it wants to keep some hallmark of quality -or simply stay.

YOUR THREAD WAS LOCKED BECAUSE OF THE ABUSE YOU HURLED AT ADMIN AND OTHER POSTERS - AS THEY ARE ALL QUITE CAPABLE OF READING
Last edited by bonnybraes1 on Tue May 20, 2008 12:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: poster stating inactitudes
User avatar
Respect4Kids
New In Town
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:08 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby bonnybraes1 » Tue May 20, 2008 12:32 pm

Enough! Quite frankly, all I see is a picture of a little girl enjoying a very large icecream, and it is personally beyond me why time and time again, photo threads degenerate into unsavoury suggestions.
This would be a good time for posters to stop insulting each other - and stop posting unpleasant remarks about their own interpretations of photos.
bonnybraes1
Moderator
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 7:46 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby gestalt » Tue May 20, 2008 12:53 pm

Mel wrote:
If You didn't make accusations of us being "questionable" then what is this taken from above?
"If I were a close family member to some of the posters on this thread tonight I'd be seriously worried"
You made other comments about my thinking reflecting on me also, sorry i don't know how to quote from one thread to another!

Yes I was mad at you & called you an idiot & I apologise for that. For you inferring that I was a perv I have yet to receive an apology!

& there was no "little game" so you are no big hero! I saw a picture the only one circulating at the time which appeared to have a severed arm, someone else corrected me & I accepted that, I am not infallible yet you go on & on about my little game!
There was a mannerly debate going on in the thread you & a few made it ugly & are trying to do the same here!

FYI! regardless of the now joined arm I think the pic has still been photoshopped & the purpose of the monster ice cream & the lollipop clearly shown by respect4kids on page 2 disturbs me even more!


A quick thank you for your apology, I will reciprocate reservedly for any offense I cause you, my reservation is it was misunderstood.


I have to leave but I will return in a couple of hours Mel and answer your points.

Meanwhile hopefully we can play nicely and bonnie won't have to pull the plug.




bonnybraes1 wrote:Enough! Quite frankly, all I see is a picture of a little girl enjoying a very large icecream, and it is personally beyond me why time and time again, photo threads degenerate into unsavoury suggestions.
This would be a good time for posters to stop insulting each other - and stop posting unpleasant remarks about their own interpretations of photos.



Hear - Hear.
User avatar
gestalt
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 12:17 am
Location: the real world

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Mel » Tue May 20, 2008 1:12 pm

gestalt wrote:
Mel wrote:
If You didn't make accusations of us being "questionable" then what is this taken from above?
"If I were a close family member to some of the posters on this thread tonight I'd be seriously worried"
You made other comments about my thinking reflecting on me also, sorry i don't know how to quote from one thread to another!

Yes I was mad at you & called you an idiot & I apologise for that. For you inferring that I was a perv I have yet to receive an apology!

& there was no "little game" so you are no big hero! I saw a picture the only one circulating at the time which appeared to have a severed arm, someone else corrected me & I accepted that, I am not infallible yet you go on & on about my little game!
There was a mannerly debate going on in the thread you & a few made it ugly & are trying to do the same here!

FYI! regardless of the now joined arm I think the pic has still been photoshopped & the purpose of the monster ice cream & the lollipop clearly shown by respect4kids on page 2 disturbs me even more!


[color=#0000FF]A quick thank you for your apology, I will reciprocate reservedly for any offense I cause you, my reservation is it was misunderstood.


I have to leave but I will return in a couple of hours Mel and answer your points.

Meanwhile hopefully we can play nicely and bonnie won't have to pull the plug.

Sorry I have quoted this wrongly above is from Gestalt, my reply below. Mel

Thank you gestalt, I appreciate that.
Mel
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 9:09 pm

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby aussieman » Tue May 20, 2008 2:10 pm

I've got a photo of my son and his eyes look exactly like Madeleine's as though he's got perfectly applied eye liner. It's just the way the photo came out - I can assure you nobody put make up on him!!
aussieman
New In Town
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 11:06 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Respect4Kids » Tue May 20, 2008 3:48 pm

aussieman wrote:I've got a photo of my son and his eyes look exactly like Madeleine's as though he's got perfectly applied eye liner. It's just the way the photo came out - I can assure you nobody put make up on him!!


Certainly.Kids like yours have beautiful eyes and they look contoured. But if you take a pic and crop it, highlight it slightly or with any other edition process--or not at all, make an enlargement, or keep it 100% natural and look at it from close, you can tell he/they have no make-up on.

In my first post I show this ,it's blatant, obvious, especially at the corner of her eye, some have said eye-shadow etc too, which it seems.A trace of make-up (black) seems to have been left/dropped at the top of her nose (near in-between eyebrows,a bit under)...but of course it's "got to be cause she's put some felt-tip pen there,...or touched some charcoal before..." etc...I am not bothered which sort of interpretations some people who don't want to see will come out with, I'm not the only one seeing that it IS make-up ,since what I read yesterday!
And it's not the first time at all.It's just so obvious this time, I'm in "after shock" and not so nice things spring to mind, actually, not when I see this.

Not when your Child is supposed to be in the CLAWS of PAEDOPHILES, no you wouldn't publish THAT, no, no one would...no one but two arguidos that laugh their heads off when they think they're OFF_AIR on a TV interview (see, "The true colours of the MCs--MUST SEE!" vid on You Tube, or "Spot the liar" etc) !
User avatar
Respect4Kids
New In Town
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 12:08 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby Betty » Tue May 20, 2008 4:15 pm

Look at how dark Madelines eyes and lashes look at the very start of this film. Despite how blonde she is, look at the rim of her eyes.

In your opinion does it look like she has make up on here?

I dont think she has, but her eyes look just as dark as the photo from the television (which isnt good enough to tell anything IMO)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MchiAYgGV_0
Betty
New In Town
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 10:42 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby beaker1 » Tue May 20, 2008 4:45 pm

First no buddies then requests for my autrograph :bounce: :bounce:

maybe a timely reminder of an interenet saying ' diss the point not the poster '

personally i'm not unwilling to go down the pedophile theory, but not while picking over photos to back a theory up with, that's just wrong and unneccessary.

i see a lot of unreasonableness (is that even a word?) posters are unwilling to see anyone elses point of view. Even when a full picture has been produced they focus on a snippet of one and wont listen to a resonable argument of why what they are seeing isn't so. That makes 'debate' impossible and a losing battle.
-----Just an opinion from a muppet.
User avatar
beaker1
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:32 am

Re: A big Thanx to MEL & ManyFaces4aChild, Appealing photos

Postby roisin » Tue May 20, 2008 5:02 pm

bonnybraes1 wrote:Enough! Quite frankly, all I see is a picture of a little girl enjoying a very large icecream, and it is personally beyond me why time and time again, photo threads degenerate into unsavoury suggestions.
This would be a good time for posters to stop insulting each other - and stop posting unpleasant remarks about their own interpretations of photos.


bonnybraes1,
I suppose I'll have to write this up as my first disagreement with a mod. I believe that it is well within our rights to express our reactions to that photo and the good reason for doing so is the allegation made by Team McCann that Maddy could have been abducted by paedos. If this were a court of law, the testimony would be allowed to explore that area in depth because THEY opened the door to it. I have avoided the discussions and the whole paedophile angle of this case (because I believe Maddy died as a result of an accident and that the crimes began with neglect and tumbled into the unthinkable after her death). Anyway, I don't like the personal insults anymore than the next person and don't want to indulge in any. I do, however, want to be free to express my reaction to the ice cream cone photo, which is to say that even if it were an originally innocent pose, it is COMPLETELY out of order for it to be in the public domain because of the way it could be (and is being) exploited. To you it is an innocent photo. You are one person, a mod, true, but I hope (and trust) you are not saying that your view of it is any more important than anyone else here who will POLITELY express another opinion to your own. If your point was "play nice", fine. If your point was "this is just an innocent photo, stop talking about it", then I'm sorry - I do not agree you have the right to stop the debate based on your own impressions. I intend to "posting unpleasant remarks about their own interpretations of photos" every time I choose to do so, if I'm not breaking any of the forum rules. (I've been quite sick this week, and am not at 100% brain power...so will remove this post if I have totally mis-read your warning!)
"Their reluctance to return to Portugal is a clear sign that they are guilty."
User avatar
roisin
Local Lag
 
Posts: 765
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:47 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Maddy - Reference Forum and Investigations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
cron