MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

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

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby HarveyHumphries » Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

blacksmith wrote: The nub of my own worries remains the special case of a forum or thread where two human beings, not black magic, freemasonry, a dead princess or the other usual suspects of forum stupidity are concerned. Is it really right that the same rules - of anonymity, any accusation goes etc - should apply then? Morally, I mean.


Without wishing to tweak your tender worry-nub too hard, how do you suggest posters should forthwith express their opinion on these two "legally innocent human beings"? I think we need a Blacksmith-calibrated Wild Assertionometer. Is talk of wife-swapping morally off-limits? Bit of chat about secret handshakes – too nasty? How about the suggestion that Kate and Gerry McCann carried their daughter's corpse out of a holiday complex in a tennis bag, then hid it before embarking on a global deception unparalleled in recent criminal history, fraudulently accruing over a million pounds along the way?

Let's remind ourselves - as you seem suddenly unable to stop doing - that the McCanns are "legally innocent". But isn't that a bit mealy-mouthed? In line with the new spirit of humane responsibility you suggest, and in the dearth of published and properly authenticated forensic evidence to the contrary, I think we are morally obliged to assume them genuinely innocent. So let's ask the bereft and guiltless Kate McCann which allegation would distress her more? Some half-baked guff about Comare or cloning, or the suggestion that through assault or neglect she was culpable for her own daughter's death, that she hid the body, faked an abduction, hoodwinked the Pope, the prime minister and the world in general, and relieved distraught grannies and children of a million quid?

The principal victim of the Masonic cloning-type conspiracies isn't Kate McCann or moral justice, but the credibility of the deluded berks who propose them. As batperson and others have said, it's really not a big ask to browse a forum like this and filter out the nutters as you go. You seemed to manage that OK at the MF.
User avatar
HarveyHumphries
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby blacksmith » Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:55 pm

HAPPYDOG wrote:
batperson wrote:
blacksmith wrote:Is it really right that the same rules - of anonymity, any accusation goes etc - should apply then? Morally, I mean.


I occasionally wonder how I would feel if I was one of the McCanns and was actually innocent, and I found this forum. I would of course be horrified. I would be keen however that the truth be known, so I would read very carefully what people were writing, and I would make every effort to address the issues raised about leaving Portugal, the fund, ignoring sightings etc. I would probably do this through the mainstream media to get the widest coverage. In short I would answer the questions.

What I see is two people who have done none of this, from which I conclude that one or more of the following is true:
* they are not like me
* they do not read any forums or blogs
* they do not care what the public think
* they are not innocent

I don't hate the McCanns. I just think they lied about their daughter's disappearance and I would like to know why.

.batperson



Good points well said batperson.

-
Yes, they are. But surely a 100+index pages of mad theories makes the McCann's task easier!

Just as their lawyers picked out almost the shabbiest, dirtiest rag in the UK to threaten with legal action, so the team can ignore the serious stuff like yours and quote at length from other parts of the 3As to point out the manifestly nonsensical nature of many of the charges made against them, asking - how could K&G possibly waste their days defending themselves against so much manifest rubbish?

More important, any of them can claim, if you want the truth read respectable papers subject to legal constraints - on the internet you'll only find anonymous nutters - again quoting liberally to prove their point.
blacksmith
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby blacksmith » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

HarveyHumphries wrote:
blacksmith wrote: The nub of my own worries remains the special case of a forum or thread where two human beings, not black magic, freemasonry, a dead princess or the other usual suspects of forum stupidity are concerned. Is it really right that the same rules - of anonymity, any accusation goes etc - should apply then? Morally, I mean.


Without wishing to tweak your tender worry-nub too hard, how do you suggest posters should forthwith express their opinion on these two "legally innocent human beings"? I think we need a Blacksmith-calibrated Wild Assertionometer. Is talk of wife-swapping morally off-limits? Bit of chat about secret handshakes – too nasty? How about the suggestion that Kate and Gerry McCann carried their daughter's corpse out of a holiday complex in a tennis bag, then hid it before embarking on a global deception unparalleled in recent criminal history, fraudulently accruing over a million pounds along the way?

Let's remind ourselves - as you seem suddenly unable to stop doing - that the McCanns are "legally innocent". But isn't that a bit mealy-mouthed? In line with the new spirit of humane responsibility you suggest, and in the dearth of published and properly authenticated forensic evidence to the contrary, I think we are morally obliged to assume them genuinely innocent. So let's ask the bereft and guiltless Kate McCann which allegation would distress her more? Some half-baked guff about Comare or cloning, or the suggestion that through assault or neglect she was culpable for her own daughter's death, that she hid the body, faked an abduction, hoodwinked the Pope, the prime minister and the world in general, and relieved distraught grannies and children of a million quid?

The principal victim of the Masonic cloning-type conspiracies isn't Kate McCann or moral justice, but the credibility of the deluded berks who propose them. As batperson and others have said, it's really not a big ask to browse a forum like this and filter out the nutters as you go. You seemed to manage that OK at the MF.

-
I'm a little surprised that my posts are attracting quite the ad hominem stuff today - it rather indicates that I've scraped a few nerves rather than massaging the mutual comfort button.

Browsing internet forums is not a hobby of mine. I make no criticism of the hobby itself. I joined the MF to find out more about the facts, yes, facts of the case, by exchanging information. Up to the autumn I did so. Since then I can hardly recall any information there or here that added to my knowledge of the case. But much noise.

Now I am expressing my own reservations about continuing participation, since no information is flowing. It's called thinking and commenting. The charge that I'm somehow looking down on others from a blameless position is a ludicrous one - of course I've been guilty of many of the things I mention! So what?

I raised questions about morality and asking ourselves about why we are posting here. Why not, on the Main Madeleine Thread? Is my bandwith usage blocking important breaking news and vital information? Hardly. And I'm am trying to think through the implications of these internet dynamics. That's bad, is it?

As for picking and choosing, people standing in a lynch mob might well be sure that they are in no way part of that mob, or participating in its aims. Others, like me, are not so certain.

Anyway I've more or less finished for the day now and will vacate my selfish bandwidth occupation - so we can all go back to discussing the really important things.
blacksmith
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby sheeple » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:52 pm

blacksmith wrote:The nub of my own worries remains the special case of a forum or thread where two human beings, not black magic, freemasonry, a dead princess or the other usual suspects of forum stupidity are concerned. Is it really right that the same rules - of anonymity, any accusation goes etc - should apply then? Morally, I mean.

Anyway, a thought provoking post of yours.


When you shove yourself down our throats like Mr Jerry and its wife have done then I think you have to accept that you will attract the attention of the cloning/bilderberg/GordonBrownLizard/COMARE/govt. coverup fraternity. And the attention of the rest of us.

You go all out for celebrity you have to deal with the public. We attack them annonymously on a forum same as we attack them in the pub, on the tube, on radio phone ins.
The Policia Judiciaria said in a statement: "We regret the baseless intervention of the spokesman above all at a moment when significant moves were being made in the investigation."
sheeple
On Parole
 
Posts: 1356
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby sheeple » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:55 pm

blacksmith wrote:More important, any of them can claim, if you want the truth read respectable papers subject to legal constraints - on the internet you'll only find anonymous nutters - again quoting liberally to prove their point.


I read The Telegraph and I've found out you don't get the truth in that.
The Policia Judiciaria said in a statement: "We regret the baseless intervention of the spokesman above all at a moment when significant moves were being made in the investigation."
sheeple
On Parole
 
Posts: 1356
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:44 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby HarveyHumphries » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:57 pm

blacksmith wrote: I'm a little surprised that my posts are attracting quite the ad hominem stuff today - it rather indicates that I've scraped a few nerves rather than massaging the mutual comfort button.

Don't flatter yourself. Got on a few wicks about covers it. In fact, you're doing it again now by opting to dismiss an objection to your brave new code of internet conduct as a personal attack.
User avatar
HarveyHumphries
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby RRR » Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:59 pm

blacksmith wrote:[

Anyway I've more or less finished for the day now and will vacate my selfish bandwidth occupation - so we can all go back to discussing the really important things.


Like - where's Verbatim gone?
RRR
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:56 am

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby SallyGardens » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:03 pm

blacksmith wrote:
Vimes wrote:[

-
Don't you dare snip for brevity: you might get someone telling you that you are deliberately distorting the post. And then attempting to disguise it.

Yes, I very much take your point.



So you admit it wasn't the "3g software", then, BS?
Last edited by bonnybraes1 on Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: report noted and closed
SallyGardens
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby blacksmith » Fri Apr 04, 2008 4:13 pm

And so we go on.
blacksmith
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 307
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby bonnybraes1 » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:37 pm

Yet again, could posters please remember that this is the Main Madeleine Thread. Please take your personal issues to PM.
bonnybraes1
Moderator
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 7:46 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby elizabeth » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:44 pm

I do not believe that you can dismiss the possibility of a government cover up because people know about it. That would be allowing the government too much ability. When an administration wants things to go away they don't always. And if you doubt that, ask Richard M. Nixon.

The truth is, the Labor party is so steeped in arrogance, they would be perfectly prepared to protect the McCanns and not bother who knew. Because they have the same sense of invulnerability that the McCanns have. Does this mean there is a cover up? No. But it is not a reason to discount the possibility.

There has to be a reason for the treatment of the McCanns. And their own arrogance and repeated lying with no fear of any come back. That is because there is no come back. When mother child neglector went on national radio and declared the tapas bar was only 20 yards from the apartment, no one, not a single person on the program said, 'That is not right.' It was accepted as the truth. The changing story about the frequency of the checks and the un/locked door is never questioned. Why? Is it just a latent xenophobia surfacing because the police are 'sardine munching' foreigners?

The one thing is that a large part of the rest of the world now regards the British as a nation of child neglectors. The media and the government and all the bodies tasked with protecting children either support the child neglect practised by these pathetic excuses for parents or are noticable by their deafening silence.
User avatar
elizabeth
Suspect
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 1:19 pm
Location: Alabama, USA

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby Whatever » Fri Apr 04, 2008 5:58 pm

blacksmith wrote:
'.... don't you have any worries about the cowardice involved in throwing stones while hidden behind a fence, safe from retribution or reality? And, secondly, are you sure you should be here, on a site where the names and avatars themselves reveal that the McCanns are being used to act out posters' fantasies of retribution and power? And are you sure, absolutely sure, you haven't been corrupted yourself?'


Regarding your first question, Sento always says, 'Normal social rules apply' and he's right. I have found it shocking the way some posters address/attack each other and am quite sure they wouldn't dream of behaving in these ways face to face. As for your second point, I'm sure that the acting out must be connected to the subject matter of the forum itself - which for me is love and trust - how can you love someone (your child) and not look after it? (trust). How can you commit a crime and not take responsibility? How can you adopt the moral high ground whilst being completely at fault yourself? How can you play with other people's feelings? How can you keep such secrets? How can you lie about who you are?

When I watch the McCanns in action, these are the questions I'm asking - as I'm sure we all are. And I agree, the weird and unconscious process of 'transference' is presumably the reason why some posters have started asking some of the very same questions of each other.

We're hurt. I watch the McCanns and I feel hurt. How can they do this to me? I trusted them in those few days. I genuinely cared about their child. There's nothing sadder than the thought of others suffering. But they lied to me and I'm powerless to prove it. Maybe what's missing from this debate is acknowledging that we've been collectively hurt....we think....and maybe the reason the 'pros' create such hostility is because they represent all the other times our pain has been dismissed, 'No you haven't been hurt - stop being so ridiculous'. Maybe this is why we are so desperate for there to be real evidence, arrests, charges and convictions. THEN our pain will be validated.
'okay, we've tried really hard and we've come up with nothing' - K. McCann
User avatar
Whatever
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:39 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby Whatever » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:10 pm

elizabeth wrote:

When mother child neglector went on national radio and declared the tapas bar was only 20 yards from the apartment, no one, not a single person on the program said, 'That is not right.' It was accepted as the truth. The changing story about the frequency of the checks and the un/locked door is never questioned. Why? Is it just a latent xenophobia surfacing because the police are 'sardine munching' foreigners?



I agree - it's bizarre, but then I think, well, it's because the whole situation is bizarre. Because this has been going on for a year, we're used to it, but realistically, it's so very unusual to have possible criminals right there, on the telly, lying. The last one I can think of is Ian Huntley and even then, we all thought he was the nice caretaker at the time. Surely what's important is how they are heard by those who matter - the police (Portuguese and British). We know that they don't just sit there politely nodding a la Jane Hill or Ian Woods.
'okay, we've tried really hard and we've come up with nothing' - K. McCann
User avatar
Whatever
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:39 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby HAPPYDOG » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:13 pm

Whatever I can so understand what you mean. I remember one article in the early days that blonde woman Ulrika saying something like 'Maddie's our child'. It really struck home. I remember in the early days feeling nothing at all but pain and sympathy for them no feelings of being mislead or anything.

My feelings gradually changed when I actually saw THEM on t.v. and Gerry's blog and the fund. Things really started to change for me. I wanted to know how they could go on like that, how could they go on the tour, why could they answer certain questions but not tell us anything substantial, how I was mislead about how far away that apartment actually was in relation to where they were dining. It wasn't like being in the back garden not at all it was so far away so very far. But what has got me the most is their publicity 'team' how they can go out there and represent a charity for missing children or try and get involved in the amber alert system, when in reality the amber alert would have done nothing for them bearing in mind the time they left her in that apartment and the times they checked. I don't know it's just that there seems to be so many inconsistencies.

I know it's none of my business of course it's not it's the police that should be dealing with this, the problem is the McCanns with their media blitz have made it something I WANT to know about. They were made arguidos and when they came back they told us all about how it couldn't have been them because of soiled nappies, Kate's corpse visits and things. Then to hear from Mrs. Healy about how it would be better for Kate and she would get more sympathy if she had a larger bosom, come on why should they expect sympathy for what they look like, or don't look like and for what they did.

I still can't believe that a group of professional people went out and left all those children in those apartments alone.

What makes me more upset is that deep down I think it's because of their status that they have been 'admired' from so many supporters. I can't understand it I just can't.
HAPPYDOG
XXXXX
User avatar
HAPPYDOG
Local Lag
 
Posts: 946
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:31 am

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK III

Postby blossom » Fri Apr 04, 2008 6:14 pm

elizabeth wrote:I do not believe that you can dismiss the possibility of a government cover up because people know about it. That would be allowing the government too much ability. When an administration wants things to go away they don't always. And if you doubt that, ask Richard M. Nixon.

The truth is, the Labor party is so steeped in arrogance, they would be perfectly prepared to protect the McCanns and not bother who knew. Because they have the same sense of invulnerability that the McCanns have. Does this mean there is a cover up? No. But it is not a reason to discount the possibility.

There has to be a reason for the treatment of the McCanns. And their own arrogance and repeated lying with no fear of any come back. That is because there is no come back. When mother child neglector went on national radio and declared the tapas bar was only 20 yards from the apartment, no one, not a single person on the program said, 'That is not right.' It was accepted as the truth. The changing story about the frequency of the checks and the un/locked door is never questioned. Why? Is it just a latent xenophobia surfacing because the police are 'sardine munching' foreigners?

The one thing is that a large part of the rest of the world now regards the British as a nation of child neglectors. The media and the government and all the bodies tasked with protecting children either support the child neglect practised by these pathetic excuses for parents or are noticable by their deafening silence.


An excellent post.
Unfortunately, this thread is a closed shop.
blossom
Local Lag
 
Posts: 957
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:27 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Maddy - Reference Forum and Investigations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests
cron