Extreme example – what harm can be done?

by DCB1 01.01.10 18:25

You are walking down a street and you think you see Madeleine?

1. Do you phone the Police/helpline?

2. Alternatively – do you ignore what you saw because you have read GAs book/and or the Foundation booklet/leaflet and believe that Madeleine is dead?

Your choice.

For those that believe abduction was a possibility then 1. is the answer.

For those that believe the publications of GA/MF then 2. is the answer.

Which option causes possible further harm?

1. causes no harm whatsoever - even if it is wrong.
2. causes considerable harm - even if it is wrong.

by Guest 01.01.10 18:42

the second one

by littlepixie 01.01.10 19:02

I don't think Maddie is dead because of any book. I believe she is dead because the British Police Officers came to that conclusion.

There has never been any official word from those Officers since.

I know LP hosts a link to their site and for the life of me I can't undestand why, I know Jim Gamble seems to be supporting Gerry McCann but I want to hear from Mark Harrison - has he changed his mind.

by DCB1 01.01.10 19:15

littlepixie wrote:I don't think Maddie is dead because of any book. I believe she is dead because the British Police Officers came to that conclusion.

There has never been any official word from those Officers since.

I know LP hosts a link to their site and for the life of me I can't undestand why, I know Jim Gamble seems to be supporting Gerry McCann but I want to hear from Mark Harrison - has he changed his mind.

Do you think MM is dead?

by Guest 01.01.10 20:43

DCB1 wrote:You are walking down a street and you think you see Madeleine?

1. Do you phone the Police/helpline?

2. Alternatively – do you ignore what you saw because you have read GAs book/and or the Foundation booklet/leaflet and believe that Madeleine is dead?

Your choice.

For those that believe abduction was a possibility then 1. is the answer.

For those that believe the publications of GA/MF then 2. is the answer.

Which option causes possible further harm?

1. causes no harm whatsoever - even if it is wrong.
2. causes considerable harm - even if it is wrong.

No. 1..........

by DCB1 01.01.10 20:47

PearlB wrote:
DCB1 wrote:You are walking down a street and you think you see Madeleine?

1. Do you phone the Police/helpline?

2. Alternatively – do you ignore what you saw because you have read GAs book/and or the Foundation booklet/leaflet and believe that Madeleine is dead?

Your choice.

For those that believe abduction was a possibility then 1. is the answer.

For those that believe the publications of GA/MF then 2. is the answer.

Which option causes possible further harm?

1. causes no harm whatsoever - even if it is wrong.
2. causes considerable harm - even if it is wrong.

No. 1..........

Thankyou pearlb for confirming what I thought.

by twinkle 01.01.10 20:50

Good question, because even if you did believe her to be dead, you could NEVER ignore the possibility that the child could be her. So EVERYONE would phone the police (wouldn't they?)...................like you say no harm done.

by Guest 01.01.10 23:49

twinkle wrote:Good question, because even if you did believe her to be dead, you could NEVER ignore the possibility that the child could be her. So EVERYONE would phone the police (wouldn't they?)...................like you say no harm done.

Thats what I thought, but I think I've chosen the wrong number further up the page.

Unforuntately for Madeleine, SOME people won't phone the police because they have it imprinted on their brains that her parents were involved.

by twinkle 02.01.10 0:12

No Raffle you have chosen the right one to answer the question.
I had to read the OP several times to clarify, too much alcohol in the bloodstream still. big grin

But surely HOWEVER you feel about this, you would have to alert the police. Anyone who says they wouldn't are talking shit.

by Ruby 02.01.10 3:35

Which Madeleine?

Caucasian or special edition Asian Madeleine?

Or stuck in time nearly three years ago Madeleine?

Who can honestly say they believe they could accurately envisage how she would look now, ~~had she lived~~?

thinking

by Slartibartfast 02.01.10 3:37

Ruby wrote:Which Madeleine?

Caucasian or special edition Asian Madeleine?

Or stuck in time nearly three years ago Madeleine?

Who can honestly say they believe they could accurately envisage how she would look now, ~~had she lived~~?

Why so cavalier with the fate of a young child?

by Ruby 02.01.10 3:45

Think you must be projecting or reading too much into, or something.

You could have walked right past her without being aware, if you believe her to still be alive, as nobody would know what she looks like now.

by Slartibartfast 02.01.10 3:47

Ruby wrote:Think you must be projecting or reading too much into, or something.

You could have walked right past her without being aware, if you believe her to still be alive, as nobody would know what she looks like now.

I was referring to you strikethrough tag at the end of your post.

You have no idea whether Madeleine is dead or alive.

by Ruby 02.01.10 4:04

Nor do you.

How is the search around the lawless villages in Luz progressing? Surely they must have covered every inch of terrain within that 10km by now?

Updates have been very sparse about that. thinking

by vaguely 02.01.10 16:26

Ruby wrote:Which Madeleine?
Madeleine McCann.

Caucasian or special edition Asian Madeleine?
Madeleine McCann.
Or stuck in time nearly three years ago Madeleine?

Who can honestly say they believe they could accurately envisage how she would look now, ~~had she lived~~?
Nobody. She has been missing nearly half of her life.

In the same was as any impression is given of any missing child - it's purely an impression. Not much more that anyone can do. imvvvvho these images are released more to keep the child in peoples minds than they are as an accurate represented of what they look like.

and it works.