The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by soulthief on 23.11.10 16:55

@espeland wrote:
@soulthief wrote:
@espeland wrote:
@littlepixie wrote:If I remember correctly, when they showed TB and the road signs, it did mention that he had got a lot of support. I did think the showing of Michael Barrymore straight after TB saying he had no history of pursuing individuals was very sly editing. There are many people who dont like Michael Barrymore, that is why his career is all but over, showing him was good but the way it was cut was childish.


Sly editing? What was sly, was TB telling an untruth? Much as I admire Tony's work re Madeleine, he let himself in for this.
Bit harsh because although he did indeed open himself up for it his intentions were good and honourable, he has nothing to be ashamed of -but Hare and the others who clearly support the McCanns have plenty to be ashamed of.


I know his intentions were good and honourable, but he should have been aware of the danger of editing. I doubt if an additional comment from him that he was instrumental in the success of the Lubbock matter would have been edited out - and Tony certainly deserves credit for that.

I don't remember whether I said this here or on another forum, but the program was about the MF and not the McCanns, so I'm not surprised that it appears - to the people here - to be one-sided.
Agree he should have been aware of editing, also he should have asked himself why Hare wanted to do this and who would benefit (McCanns)but the fact is its blatant Tony is old school decent, a quality not often seen nowadays, he has little street cred (sorry I am not as eloquent as Tony so maybe that's the wrong word)but anyway Tony is blatantly naive to how underhand people can be and that's not his fault, its just the world he lives in.I still say there was an ulterior motive on Hare's part

soulthief

Posts : 695
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-07-07
Location : where ever I lay my hat

View user profile http://www.youtube.com/user/xS0ulThiefx

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by kangdang on 23.11.10 19:29

Hello Espeland, long time no see. Hope you are keeping chipper.

____________________
Indeed, I swallow a textbook everyday….a fact of which I am proud smug By far preferable and productive than wasting precious hours concocting and launching vitriolic attacks against others in the hope of gaining a few claps on a board frequented by lesser life form.

kangdang

Posts : 1680
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-01-29
Age : 38
Location : Corona Mountain

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by espeland on 23.11.10 20:00

@kangdang wrote:Hello Espeland, long time no see. Hope you are keeping chipper.


Hi Kangdang, were we on the Sky Forum or was it the Mirror F? I'm also on TMCF as 'camera'. This damned case goes on and on, doesn't it? At least there will be a formidable list of prison sentences when they are eventually nailed - as they will be. And I rather think a few on here will insist on the BBC making an on-air apology! Hope all is well with you.

espeland

Posts : 205
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by kangdang on 23.11.10 20:11

@espeland wrote:
@kangdang wrote:Hello Espeland, long time no see. Hope you are keeping chipper.


Hi Kangdang, were we on the Sky Forum or was it the Mirror F? I'm also on TMCF as 'camera'. This damned case goes on and on, doesn't it? At least there will be a formidable list of prison sentences when they are eventually nailed - as they will be. And I rather think a few on here will insist on the BBC making an on-air apology! Hope all is well with you.

MirrorF. I posted under anothe name, I was at the MF conference off the M25,seated to the left TB...you was on the opposite side up the top end..... Don't ever ask me for directions.. big grin

____________________
Indeed, I swallow a textbook everyday….a fact of which I am proud smug By far preferable and productive than wasting precious hours concocting and launching vitriolic attacks against others in the hope of gaining a few claps on a board frequented by lesser life form.

kangdang

Posts : 1680
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-01-29
Age : 38
Location : Corona Mountain

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by espeland on 23.11.10 20:21

@kangdang wrote:
@espeland wrote:
@kangdang wrote:Hello Espeland, long time no see. Hope you are keeping chipper.


Hi Kangdang, were we on the Sky Forum or was it the Mirror F? I'm also on TMCF as 'camera'. This damned case goes on and on, doesn't it? At least there will be a formidable list of prison sentences when they are eventually nailed - as they will be. And I rather think a few on here will insist on the BBC making an on-air apology! Hope all is well with you.

MirrorF. I posted under anothe name, I was at the MF conference off the M25,seated to the left TB...you was on the opposite side up the top end..... Don't ever ask me for directions..


Oh right. Directions to the Harlow hotel weren't my bugbear - it was the traffic holdups. Finding my way home was a nightmare, though . We'll (participants of all MF meetings) all have to have a celebration gettogether when this is eventually over.

espeland

Posts : 205
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-10-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by kangdang on 23.11.10 20:29

To damn right

____________________
Indeed, I swallow a textbook everyday….a fact of which I am proud smug By far preferable and productive than wasting precious hours concocting and launching vitriolic attacks against others in the hope of gaining a few claps on a board frequented by lesser life form.

kangdang

Posts : 1680
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-01-29
Age : 38
Location : Corona Mountain

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by aiyoyo on 23.11.10 22:03

@kangdang wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Oh come on, I dont think the programme was an entrapment of MF for CR.

It was just BBC usual load of shites ..sycophantic and self serving..that's all.

I'm not so sure about that aiyoyo. Whilst I do not think that this was the overall intention of Hare or the BBC they certainly made sure they presented a few offerings to CR.

Well, kangdang you've a valid point especially considering HS timing of initial contact with MF looks suspicious and considering also he lied about couple of issues, it certainly look that way so who know HS real motive.

Let's put it this way BBC projected MF negatively. Like most posters observed most of the issues they covered were unnecessary unless their purpose was to make MF looks dodgy.
Viewers unware of the DVD were not an inch clearer about the reasons behind MF campaign works so BBC was missing the point altogether. In fact the negative protrayal gave MF a bad image.

Despite BBC's legal obligation to practise fair play and HS promised to protray MF in an unbiased manner, that didnt quite come across.
IF I were unware of MF good works, watching the programme what came across was the exposing of a group that works against the mccanns and the group wasnt protrayed in favourable lights. The mention of CR threats and TB's undertaking certainly made it looked as if MF has no right to do that, which was so wrong and a betrayal, so that begs the question did BBC have an ulterior motive?

What infuriates me it HS failure to mention there were more skeptics than those members at MF. I also intensely resent his cowardice way of observing the mccanns libel by showing lack of deference for Amaral. Why was there a need to show clip of Amaral's 'ask the mccanns' comment, something which BBC misinterpretated which they were aware because they received complaints about it, so why the inclusion fails me?

If they intended to be fair, mentioning the book ban overturned would constitute fair imo. That one point alone would say a lot about the mccanns tale and the purpose of MF work.

Posters correctly observed TB and MF braved it, kudo and hugh respect to them. TB took the opportunity when he was offered to highlight MF work, who can blame him. But HS let him and MF members down that much is so patently obvious.
HS mention of TB liking the camera was double meaning loaded imo.

Like one poster said, even if MF didnt participate, Inside Out might still do the programme.
That may be true but without MF willing participation, the context would be difference and implications difference. Taking BBC to task would be easier if they were biased especially when they didnt have permission for the filming.

On the whole HS came off much worst than MF.
He comes across as a creepy fellow. I especially dislike the way he revealed details about the conference, how he was picked up, the venue and all that, making it out as though there were only 19 mccanns skeptics and even after having attended it he said he still hasnt a clue what MF is about - what was that about?
He literally self invited himself and then turned round and bite his host.

What a true professional and gentleman wouldnt do is: they dont invite people to come on their programme, accept their cooperation and hospitality of being invited to view their work, then turn around and featured them negatively. Well, that's the mind of sly fox, and HS managed to show himself to be one.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Angelique on 23.11.10 22:55

Alas the writing was on the wall as you say Angelique. Though it would have been wonderful to be pleasantly surprised by Mr Hare.... sadly our UK journalists are a lost cause it seems.

Though hats off to Channel 4 and their recent interview of the McCanns...... certainly a major step in the right direction. [/quote]

Pennylane

Yes I suppose any publicity should be considered progress - Tony Bennett did show a calm and authorative manner.

smilie

Angelique

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by aiyoyo on 23.11.10 23:01

@soulthief wrote:Although I say I think Tony was naive where the programme was concerned I have great respect for Tony & what he is doing, I just think bringing up metric signs and Barrymore could make Tony look like he just likes to go on crusades..REMEMBER, we know the foundation and what it stands for, the people watching possibly do not, I also think showing Tony behind the McCanns could make Tony look spooky coupled with the quote of watching them, Bringing Butler in to it was pointless, even more so her claiming to be threatened. I Say that this is a pre-emptive strike on behalf of the McCanns. Oh yea and the woman behind the lamp post made it look as if she is ashamed of what she was doing.

That is where the BBC has become a pathetic joke. IF the person had expressed a wish not be filmed why include that clip? It was supposed to be a featured-documentary, not a mockery program. They promised fair play but played dirty instead.

The person might be camera shy plus cant be arsed to face any repercussion.
The person wants to do good work without the being in the limelight - is that so difficult for the camera man or BBC to understand? What was their point when they included something as banal as that?

If I were that person I would lodge a complain.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Cheshire Cat on 23.11.10 23:10

@aiyoyo wrote:
@kangdang wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Oh come on, I dont think the programme was an entrapment of MF for CR.

It was just BBC usual load of shites ..sycophantic and self serving..that's all.

I'm not so sure about that aiyoyo. Whilst I do not think that this was the overall intention of Hare or the BBC they certainly made sure they presented a few offerings to CR.

Well, kangdang you've a valid point especially considering HS timing of initial contact with MF looks suspicious and considering also he lied about couple of issues, it certainly look that way so who know HS real motive.

Let's put it this way BBC projected MF negatively. Like most posters observed most of the issues they covered were unnecessary unless their purpose was to make MF looks dodgy.
Viewers unware of the DVD were not an inch clearer about the reasons behind MF campaign works so BBC was missing the point altogether. In fact the negative protrayal gave MF a bad image.

Despite BBC's legal obligation to practise fair play and HS promised to protray MF in an unbiased manner, that didnt quite come across.
IF I were unware of MF good works, watching the programme what came across was the exposing of a group that works against the mccanns and the group wasnt protrayed in favourable lights. The mention of CR threats and TB's undertaking certainly made it looked as if MF has no right to do that, which was so wrong and a betrayal, so that begs the question did BBC have an ulterior motive?

What infuriates me it HS failure to mention there were more skeptics than those members at MF. I also intensely resent his cowardice way of observing the mccanns libel by showing lack of deference for Amaral. Why was there a need to show clip of Amaral's 'ask the mccanns' comment, something which BBC misinterpretated which they were aware because they received complaints about it, so why the inclusion fails me?

If they intended to be fair, mentioning the book ban overturned would constitute fair imo. That one point alone would say a lot about the mccanns tale and the purpose of MF work.

Posters correctly observed TB and MF braved it, kudo and hugh respect to them. TB took the opportunity when he was offered to highlight MF work, who can blame him. But HS let him and MF members down that much is so patently obvious.
HS mention of TB liking the camera was double meaning loaded imo.

Like one poster said, even if MF didnt participate, Inside Out might still do the programme.
That may be true but without MF willing participation, the context would be difference and implications difference. Taking BBC to task would be easier if they were biased especially when they didnt have permission for the filming.

On the whole HS came off much worst than MF.
He comes across as a creepy fellow. I especially dislike the way he revealed details about the conference, how he was picked up, the venue and all that, making it out as though there were only 19 mccanns skeptics and even after having attended it he said he still hasnt a clue what MF is about - what was that about?
He literally self invited himself and then turned round and bite his host.

What a true professional and gentleman wouldnt do is: they dont invite people to come on their programme, accept their cooperation and hospitality of being invited to view their work, then turn around and featured them negatively. Well, that's the mind of sly fox, and HS managed to show himself to be one.

I am a member of MF and I feel good about the program!

Simon Hare probably is a bit of a sly fox, he's a reporter, goes with the turf.

However, the program did show the heavy handed methods being used to stifle free speech by CR.

The images of Tony and the road signs bought a bit of light relief - a true English eccentric! I thought the MF member hiding behind the post was done in a playful way and it made the point that people don't want to be identified - Simon knows the reasons why.

You have to remember Simon Hare has a remit to make interesting and entertaining television programmes and I think he succeeded with the MF mini-documentary.

24 hours later and it still gets from me.

Cheshire Cat
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 660
Reputation : 21
Join date : 2010-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by kangdang on 23.11.10 23:13

What a true professional and gentleman wouldnt do is: they dont invite people to come on their programme, accept their cooperation and hospitality of being invited to view their work, then turn around and featured them negatively. Well, that's the mind of sly fox, and HS managed to show himself to be one.

Absolutely, my opinion of him being a reasonable chap has certainly gone down the pan. He will be getting a sharp letter from me in the next few weeks...he has not only lied on several matters, he has broken assurances too. Mr. Hare would be wise to be mindful of this.

ETA...on that note I'm sodding off to bed, night all.

____________________
Indeed, I swallow a textbook everyday….a fact of which I am proud smug By far preferable and productive than wasting precious hours concocting and launching vitriolic attacks against others in the hope of gaining a few claps on a board frequented by lesser life form.

kangdang

Posts : 1680
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-01-29
Age : 38
Location : Corona Mountain

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by aiyoyo on 24.11.10 6:22

@Cheshire Cat wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@kangdang wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Oh come on, I dont think the programme was an entrapment of MF for CR.

It was just BBC usual load of shites ..sycophantic and self serving..that's all.

I'm not so sure about that aiyoyo. Whilst I do not think that this was the overall intention of Hare or the BBC they certainly made sure they presented a few offerings to CR.

Well, kangdang you've a valid point especially considering HS timing of initial contact with MF looks suspicious and considering also he lied about couple of issues, it certainly looked that way so who knows HS real motive.

Let's put it this way BBC projected MF negatively. Like most posters observed most of the issues they covered were unnecessary unless their purpose was to make MF looks dodgy.
Viewers unaware of the DVD were not an inch clearer about the reasons behind MF campaign works so BBC was missing the point altogether. In fact the negative protrayal gave MF a bad image.

Despite BBC's legal obligation to practise fair play and HS promised to protray MF in an unbiased manner, that didnt quite come across.
IF I were unaware of MF good works, watching the programme what came across was the exposing of a group that works against the mccanns and the group wasnt protrayed in favourable lights. The mention of CR threats and TB's undertaking certainly made it looked as if MF has no right to do that, which was so wrong and a betrayal, so that begs the question did BBC have an ulterior motive?

What infuriates me it HS failure to mention there were more skeptics than those members at MF. I also intensely resent his cowardice way of observing the mccanns libel by showing lack of deference for Amaral. Why was there a need to show clip of Amaral's 'ask the mccanns' comment, something which BBC misinterpretated which they were aware because they received complaints about it, so why the inclusion fails me?

If they intended to be fair, mentioning the book ban overturned would constitute fair imo. That one point alone would say a lot about the mccanns tale and the purpose of MF work.

Posters correctly observed TB and MF braved it, kudo and hugh respect to them. TB took the opportunity when he was offered to highlight MF work, who can blame him. But HS let him and MF members down that much is so patently obvious.
HS mention of TB liking the camera was double meaning loaded imo.

Like one poster said, even if MF didnt participate, Inside Out might still do the programme.
That may be true but without MF willing participation, the context would be different and implications different. Taking BBC to task would be easier if they were biased especially when they didnt have permission for the filming.

On the whole HS came off much worst than MF.
He comes across as a creepy fellow. I especially dislike the way he revealed details about the conference, how he was picked up, the venue and all that, making it out as though there were only 19 mccanns skeptics and even after having attended it he said he still hasnt a clue what MF is about - what was that about?
He literally self invited himself and then turned round and bite his host.

What a true professional and gentleman wouldnt do is: they dont invite people to come on their programme, accept their cooperation and hospitality of being invited to view their work, then turn around and featured them negatively. Well, that's the mind of sly fox, and HS managed to show himself to be one.

I am a member of MF and I feel good about the program!

Simon Hare probably is a bit of a sly fox, he's a reporter, goes with the turf.

However, the program did show the heavy handed methods being used to stifle free speech by CR.

The images of Tony and the road signs bought a bit of light relief - a true English eccentric! I thought the MF member hiding behind the post was done in a playful way and it made the point that people don't want to be identified - Simon knows the reasons why.

You have to remember Simon Hare has a remit to make interesting and entertaining television programmes and I think he succeeded with the MF mini-documentary.

24 hours later and it still gets from me.

Cheshire cat,

I fully understand where you are coming from.
I presume you were involved and felt it was only light banter, bit of a cat and mouse lightheartedness and all, but with no disrespect casual viewers not in the scene and having no contact or friendly banter with the producer or cameraman may not view it that way.

It was supposed to be a documetary not a reality or game show, so why risked been miscontrued as shameful to be been distributing the leaftles as some posters already posited it that way. It wasnt a live show, and that bit could easily have been edited out, if it was a broadcast live I could fully understand it.

He could have interviewed more people and included their views about mccanns if he wanted to make it entertaining. It's always interesting to know what people on the street think. Or he could have been standing next to TB having a dialogue about MF works or discussing why they questioned the mccanns thesis. That would enthrall people more and hold their attention especially if a few facts came to light. And, it wouldnt be libellous to ask or listen to the public's opinion.

Well, personally if you ask me, I feel they could have done better, it was a damn waste of good opportunity.
But as you said, not all is lost. HE did mention the PJ thesis and that there are skeptics out there doubting the mccanns.

Let's me put it this way he didnt promote the MF in a manner he promised to do so, and that could just as easily be done. Plus he was well aware of MF's concerns that they dont want to be protrayed negatively, fair trading code highlighted to him and all that, and he went and did what he did disregarding MF's concerns totally; that plus he lied. Not delivering his ban overturned promise is one thing, but deliberately tracking down DB first in Spain then back in UK to feature her and her lies (despite the history given to him and his assurance) without first clearing or pre informing MF is underhanded.

IF you think that goes with the turf, then that is dishonesty and BBC is scrapping the barrel.
IF he was a parrapazzi (sp) or tabloid producing gossips and churning out titty tatty about celebrities and royalties or what not, underhand tactics to sensationalise his programme is a different matter from a documentary.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Cheshire Cat on 24.11.10 8:17

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Cheshire Cat wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@kangdang wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:Oh come on, I dont think the programme was an entrapment of MF for CR.

It was just BBC usual load of shites ..sycophantic and self serving..that's all.

I'm not so sure about that aiyoyo. Whilst I do not think that this was the overall intention of Hare or the BBC they certainly made sure they presented a few offerings to CR.

Well, kangdang you've a valid point especially considering HS timing of initial contact with MF looks suspicious and considering also he lied about couple of issues, it certainly looked that way so who knows HS real motive.

Let's put it this way BBC projected MF negatively. Like most posters observed most of the issues they covered were unnecessary unless their purpose was to make MF looks dodgy.
Viewers unaware of the DVD were not an inch clearer about the reasons behind MF campaign works so BBC was missing the point altogether. In fact the negative protrayal gave MF a bad image.

Despite BBC's legal obligation to practise fair play and HS promised to protray MF in an unbiased manner, that didnt quite come across.
IF I were unaware of MF good works, watching the programme what came across was the exposing of a group that works against the mccanns and the group wasnt protrayed in favourable lights. The mention of CR threats and TB's undertaking certainly made it looked as if MF has no right to do that, which was so wrong and a betrayal, so that begs the question did BBC have an ulterior motive?

What infuriates me it HS failure to mention there were more skeptics than those members at MF. I also intensely resent his cowardice way of observing the mccanns libel by showing lack of deference for Amaral. Why was there a need to show clip of Amaral's 'ask the mccanns' comment, something which BBC misinterpretated which they were aware because they received complaints about it, so why the inclusion fails me?

If they intended to be fair, mentioning the book ban overturned would constitute fair imo. That one point alone would say a lot about the mccanns tale and the purpose of MF work.

Posters correctly observed TB and MF braved it, kudo and hugh respect to them. TB took the opportunity when he was offered to highlight MF work, who can blame him. But HS let him and MF members down that much is so patently obvious.
HS mention of TB liking the camera was double meaning loaded imo.

Like one poster said, even if MF didnt participate, Inside Out might still do the programme.
That may be true but without MF willing participation, the context would be different and implications different. Taking BBC to task would be easier if they were biased especially when they didnt have permission for the filming.

On the whole HS came off much worst than MF.
He comes across as a creepy fellow. I especially dislike the way he revealed details about the conference, how he was picked up, the venue and all that, making it out as though there were only 19 mccanns skeptics and even after having attended it he said he still hasnt a clue what MF is about - what was that about?
He literally self invited himself and then turned round and bite his host.

What a true professional and gentleman wouldnt do is: they dont invite people to come on their programme, accept their cooperation and hospitality of being invited to view their work, then turn around and featured them negatively. Well, that's the mind of sly fox, and HS managed to show himself to be one.

I am a member of MF and I feel good about the program!

Simon Hare probably is a bit of a sly fox, he's a reporter, goes with the turf.

However, the program did show the heavy handed methods being used to stifle free speech by CR.

The images of Tony and the road signs bought a bit of light relief - a true English eccentric! I thought the MF member hiding behind the post was done in a playful way and it made the point that people don't want to be identified - Simon knows the reasons why.

You have to remember Simon Hare has a remit to make interesting and entertaining television programmes and I think he succeeded with the MF mini-documentary.

24 hours later and it still gets from me.

Cheshire cat,

I fully understand where you are coming from.
I presume you were involved and felt it was only light banter, bit of a cat and mouse lightheartedness and all, but with no disrespect casual viewers not in the scene and having no contact or friendly banter with the producer or cameraman may not view it that way.

It was supposed to be a documetary not a reality or game show, so why risked been miscontrued as shameful to be been distributing the leaftles as some posters already posited it that way. It wasnt a live show, and that bit could easily have been edited out, if it was a broadcast live I could fully understand it.

He could have interviewed more people and included their views about mccanns if he wanted to make it entertaining. It's always interesting to know what people on the street think. Or he could have been standing next to TB having a dialogue about MF works or discussing why they questioned the mccanns thesis. That would enthrall people more and hold their attention especially if a few facts came to light. And, it wouldnt be libellous to ask or listen to the public's opinion.

Well, personally if you ask me, I feel they could have done better, it was a damn waste of good opportunity.
But as you said, not all is lost. HE did mention the PJ thesis and that there are skeptics out there doubting the mccanns.

Let's me put it this way he didnt promote the MF in a manner he promised to do so, and that could just as easily be done. Plus he was well aware of MF's concerns that they dont want to be protrayed negatively, fair trading code highlighted to him and all that, and he went and did what he did disregarding MF's concerns totally; that plus he lied. Not delivering his ban overturned promise is one thing, but deliberately tracking down DB first in Spain then back in UK to feature her and her lies (despite the history given to him and his assurance) without first clearing or pre informing MF is underhanded.

IF you think that goes with the turf, then that is dishonesty and BBC is scrapping the barrel.
IF he was a parrapazzi (sp) or tabloid producing gossips and churning out titty tatty about celebrities and royalties or what not, underhand tactics to sensationalise his programme is a different matter from a documentary.

Thanks for the reply. I wasn't involved in the making of the programme but I did briefly meet Hare on location.

I do not think the Beeb report fairly on many issues and particularly with the Maddie case - there was no news from Lisbon (in Jan/Feb) when GA was able to show the support he has from professionals in Portugal and also the revelation of Lee Rainbows report. Yes, there were items in the newspapers and court feeds on Sky but the BBC? Not a sausage!

Cheshire Cat
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 660
Reputation : 21
Join date : 2010-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Irish Eyes on 24.11.10 9:45

I don't know what this person's agenda is but I would imagine his site is very near the top of Carter Rucks list of those to watch. He unashamedly produces pics that suggest the McC's killed their daughter and is then hailed as some kind of God by those anti's who spam newspaper sites with comments which give them a bad name i/e internet nutters as shown in the BBC prog.

He then links himself (no pun intended) to Joanna Morias's site. I wonder what impression that gives to HER cause? Does Goncalo really need those images attached to his name? Of course not.

If anyone is a liability to Madeleine's cause it's his pictures actually.

At least Bennett has the bottle to take his cause to the streets and make noise. There are plenty of people who don't like what Bennett does but that does not give 'Himself' the right to make those who do feel stupid e.g his comment to wake up and smell the goddammed coffee is uncalled for.Who does he think he is?

Just my opinon of course.

Irish Eyes

Posts : 101
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-04-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Anna on 24.11.10 12:27

As a member of MCF I believe on the PM grapevine that it is Himself who has been instrumental in turning Joana against the MF, for what reason I don't know but the MF is not allowed to be discussed on that forum which is rapidly becoming a joke. Freedom of speach is not allowed on there unless it echoes their views.

Several people have been victimised by the admin and her staff and one or two have been banned.

I thought the cause that Himself refers to is for the case to be reopened which is what I thought Mr Bennett was in London for, to petition the Prime Minister. There's no pleasing some folk.

I would just like to add that I thank Mr Bennett and his supporters for their hard work and am pleased that someone has the courage to do something.

Anna

Posts : 23
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-03-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Autumn on 24.11.10 14:54

hi Anna and welcome

Speaking as one of the banned from MCF, I totally agree with your comments and interesting to learn that Himself is probably involved in the anti MF campaign on that forum. As you say, it is ridiculous when, presumably, both are fighting the same cause and want the same thing, what on earth does Himself hope to achieve by attacking the one organization that has gone out on a limb to get the case re-opened? As for Joana, does she fail to see the hypocrisy in her behaviour, banging on about freedom of speech for Amaral whilst banning those whose opinions do not echo her own? Furthermore, she and her staff are very rude towards many of the members, somehow can't see them sticking around to be treated like sh*t on her shoe for much longer - if MCF carry on like this, they will continue to lose decent posters and their determination to cause divisions amongst 'antis' will inevitably damage the cause. Thank goodness those who aren't members cannot read the contents of the MCF.

Autumn

Posts : 2603
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Tony Bennett on 24.11.10 15:09

@Anna wrote:I would just like to add that I thank Mr Bennett and his supporters for their hard work and am pleased that someone has the courage to do something.
That is a very kind comment - thank you.

I can assure you that I heartily wish that people much better than me had been there to make a public stand on the issues about this case that matter to us all here. I have only done so because very few others seemed to want to put their names forward publicly.

And I can well understand why.

Look at what has happened for example to the one person in Portugal who made a very public stand against the abduction claim. It has not been a pretty sight - and there is a long road to go for him despite the welcome unfreezing of the ban on his book.

Nasty and powerful people have always been utterly ruthless towards their real or perceived opponents. For example:

* Roman Emperors throwing Christians to the lions

* The so-called 'Holy Inquisition* torturing and killing its opponents

* Hitler's Nazis and the gas chambers

* Communist Russia locking up writers like Solzhenitsyn in the gulags

* Today's Islamists killing people like the Dutch film-maker who exposed their true nature.

Nasty and powerful people all...we must stand up to them.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by cbcannie on 24.11.10 16:21

Hello all I come in peace.

I've been lurking for quite some time now although doing a lot of reading of many sites, especially this one and am totally in awe of the work of Tony Bennett and the Madeleine Foundation supporters. I think you all deserve a medal for helping to keep this case in the news. People should be allowed to make their own minds up and not be spoon fed from the media. I am particularly interested in the 'Guests and OC facilities' forum as there is some remarkable research being done in there with the creche records etc and I'm sure one of you may just crack this case or at lease help to get it reopened. One question I would like an answer to is this: Now that Dr Amaral's book is in the public domain along with all the police files does that mean it would be impossible to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice? Surely the McCanns could argue they would never get a fair trial should they ever be charged with neglect or something much worse? I also wonder if that's why not much is mentioned in the UK because they wouldn't want to jeopardise any potential trial in the UK?

regards

Carolyn

cbcannie

Posts : 3
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by littlepixie on 24.11.10 16:27

Hiya cbcannie.
I would have thought that they would be charged in Portugal if they are ever charged regarding Madeleines' disappearance. If there are ever fraud charges I presume these would be dealt with in the UK. I have often wondered whether the lack of info in the UK is to protect any future prosecution. The Police in this Country are really good at keeping things quiet when they are trying to build a case against someone. I've lost count of the number of times I have been totally gobsmacked when someone has suddenly been arrested and charged and no-one saw it coming.

littlepixie

Posts : 1340
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2009-11-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Guest on 24.11.10 16:33

hi cbcannie and welcome

I couldn't imagine how they could claim that here because they have the media and newspapers on side. They sued the papers and got damages and front page apologies for some of the early articles and since then everything written has been in the main on their side.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

When is a 'fair trial' possible.

Post by Tony Bennett on 24.11.10 16:37

@cbcannie wrote:One question I would like an answer to is this: Now that Dr Amaral's book is in the public domain along with all the police files does that mean it would be impossible to bring the perpetrators of this crime to justice? Surely the McCanns could argue they would never get a fair trial should they ever be charged with neglect or something much worse? I also wonder if that's why not much is mentioned in the UK because they wouldn't want to jeopardise any potential trial in the UK?
Well, Carolyn, thanks once again for the kind words, I'll make sure they are passed on to our members.

I think it could be argued that one of the strategies of the McCann Team from the 'off' was to create such a media storm that when the smokescreen surrounding what actually happened dispersed, and we got nearer and nearer to the truth (as some are doing on this very forum as you say), they could cry - if charges against them were ever brought - "We won't get a fair trial".

The counter-argument to that is: "You started this media blitz in the first place".

It is admittedly a potential problem when famous cases get to trial - the O.J. Simpson trial was one such example. Wasn't that argument IIRC run in the trial of the killers of little Jamie Bulger? - because of the level of public revulsion at his killing?

This has been such a global event that the McCanns will always be able to argue they wouldn't get a fair trial. You could argue that books such as 'The Truth About A Lie' and '60 Reasons' would prejudice a fair trial, but they are by no means an absolute barrier to such a trial taking place.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by Cheshire Cat on 24.11.10 16:47

@Anna wrote:As a member of MCF I believe on the PM grapevine that it is Himself who has been instrumental in turning Joana against the MF, for what reason I don't know but the MF is not allowed to be discussed on that forum which is rapidly becoming a joke. Freedom of speach is not allowed on there unless it echoes their views.

Several people have been victimised by the admin and her staff and one or two have been banned.

I thought the cause that Himself refers to is for the case to be reopened which is what I thought Mr Bennett was in London for, to petition the Prime Minister. There's no pleasing some folk.

I would just like to add that I thank Mr Bennett and his supporters for their hard work and am pleased that someone has the courage to do something.

But the MF send donations to the GA fund that was set up by Joanna? The MF support GA and all those in Portugal who are working for justice for Maddie.

Cheshire Cat
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 660
Reputation : 21
Join date : 2010-08-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Discussion on BBC Programme re MF - Inside Out 7.30 pm 22/11/10

Post by ufercoffy on 24.11.10 18:02

@Cheshire Cat wrote:
@Anna wrote:As a member of MCF I believe on the PM grapevine that it is Himself who has been instrumental in turning Joana against the MF, for what reason I don't know but the MF is not allowed to be discussed on that forum which is rapidly becoming a joke. Freedom of speach is not allowed on there unless it echoes their views.

Several people have been victimised by the admin and her staff and one or two have been banned.

I thought the cause that Himself refers to is for the case to be reopened which is what I thought Mr Bennett was in London for, to petition the Prime Minister. There's no pleasing some folk.

I would just like to add that I thank Mr Bennett and his supporters for their hard work and am pleased that someone has the courage to do something.

But the MF send donations to the GA fund that was set up by Joanna? The MF support GA and all those in Portugal who are working for justice for Maddie.

Exactly, so why is he being so especially to those supposedly on the same side of the fence.

I'm sure if Goncarlo didn't approve of the MF he'd have made it known by now. I don't think he would accept money from them if he didn't approve of their efforts. Who is this guy 'Himself' anyway to say who should do what - is he in charge or something? Rolling Eyes

Maybe it's because Joana and her team want all the glory and don't like others stealing their limelight? I don't think there's any place in this case for people to want their egos stroked, this is about Madeleine not Himself or Joana.

Keep up the great work TB!

____________________
Whose cadaver scent and bodily fluid was found in the McCann's apartment and hire car if not Madeleine's?  Shocked

ufercoffy

Posts : 1641
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2010-01-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

FULL WORDING OF ALAN-MARC LOGOA PETITION

Post by Tony Bennett on 24.11.10 18:13

@Anna wrote:I thought the cause that Himself refers to is for the case to be reopened which is what I thought Mr Bennett was in London for, to petition the Prime Minister...
To Anna and all on this thread...

I'd like to be very clear about what it is that Alan-Marc Logoa's petition is calling for and why we support it.

What we are calling for is a full public enquiry into all aspects of the Madeleine McCann case, with the power to summon witnesses.

This is in fact very differnt from a police re-investigation.

To clear up any doubts, this is the exact wording on the Care Petitions site - you can view the petition on our website www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk, click on the Care Petitions icon, top right [there are 477 signatories to date]:

WORDING OF ALAN-MARC LOGOA PETITION

Why is it necessary to have a public enquiry into missing Madeleine McCann? Let us consider a few salient facts.

This was a British girl, nearly 4 years old when she was reported missing. There are widely divergent views on what really happened to her. The McCanns claim she was abducted. The original senior detective in the case and his team believed the evidence pointed to Madeleine having died in her parents holiday apartment.

When the case was shelved by the Portuguese authorities, their final report left both the above options open, but said there was insufficient evidence to charge any individual with any crime relating to Madeleines disappearance. Public opinion ranges from those who fully support and believe in the McCanns account of events, to those who consider that they have reason to doubt it.

The McCanns recently met with Home Secretary Alan Johnson to demand a re-investigation into Madeleines disappearance and now the new Home Secretary Theresa May has also agreed to meet them.

The McCanns' own spokesman, Mr Clarence Mitchell, admitted earlier this year that Madeleines disappearance was A Complete Mystery. Despite the McCanns having spent literally millions of pounds, most of it raised from the public, on a string of private detective agencies, none of us have any clue whatsoever as to where she might be.

There has been no court case of any kind which might help to establish the truth about what happened to her. A public enquiry with the power to summon witnesses is the most likely to be able to get to the truth. All those with eye-witness or relevant expert evidence to bring to bear on the subject should be summoned to give evidence, and be open to being cross-examined.

If you support this petition, you will be helping to press the government to hold a public enquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine, probably the only way we can establish what might have happened to her.

Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13972
Reputation : 2147
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum