Trades Descriptions

by **PeterMac** 08.01.12 9:12

The paperback edition is advertised on Amazon uk as

Madeleine: Our daughter's disappearance and the continuing search for her by Kate McCann (Paperback - 26 Apr 2012)
Buy new: ~~£7.99~~ £5.11
Available for pre-order. This item will be released on 26 April 2012.

two points I had not noticed before
1 " Disappearance" Not "Abduction". This is their book, and they cannot bring themselves to say abduction, which surely would be a more powerful word for the front cover.
2 The lack of a comma in the rubric, after 'continuing search for her' making it appear that Kate herself was doing the searching. Does this contravene the Trades Descriptions Act ?

by Guest 08.01.12 10:47

You are right PeterMac, its actually on the front cover of the book. Why not the word abduction?

by **PeterMac** 08.01.12 11:31

Perhaps because it is only a "working hypothesis", or an "assumption". They said that, through their spokesman. So far as I know they have never sought to correct what he said.

by Shibboleth 08.01.12 13:40

It is with the word 'continuing' that I have the issue. When did they start the search?

by **PeterMac** 08.01.12 13:45

Shibboleth wrote:It is with the word 'continuing' that I have the issue. When did they start the search?

The following morning. For one hour, according to Katie, when they leapt over walls and scrabbled about in the undergrowth, looking in places which her dear husband Gerry, did not have the heart or the wit to tell her was useless, because - remember - ...
HE already knew of the JT sighting.
But did not tell her. So the scrabbling about, mucking up nice new trainers and getting hot and bothered was a total waste of time.
IF it happened...
IF it has been accurately reported....
I do not remember if any of the Tapasniks referred to it - or if they joined in. And I have frankly lost the will to read their drivel again

by Guest 08.01.12 14:29

candyfloss wrote:

You are right PeterMac, its actually on the front cover of the book. Why not the word abduction?

Remember the brain Will always try to tell the truth..the abduction is a Lie,dissaperence is closer to the truth and at the same time do not rule out abduction. Therefor easier for her to use that Word..because she is lying...

by rainbow-fairy 09.01.12 18:11

I would think, using the McCanns own emissions and omissions we can safely say that they know exactly what happened.
Why?
Well...
'Abduction' has fallen from favour.
Kate stated that 'it was an insult to her intelligence' to suggest Madeleine could have possibly left the apartment herself SO
IF she wasn't abducted, and she DIDN'T wander out, that can only really leave one possibility...

by **PeterMac** 09.01.12 21:22

rainbow-fairy wrote:...SO
IF she wasn't abducted, and she DIDN'T wander out, that can only really leave one possibility...

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"

by rainbow-fairy 10.01.12 9:24

PeterMac wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:...SO
IF she wasn't abducted, and she DIDN'T wander out, that can only really leave one possibility...
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"

Exactement, PeterMac! If a=b then a cannot =c!
The McCanns really MUST accept that the laws of nature, physics and plain COMMON SENSE cannot be re-written just for them. They apply to them too. If 99.9% of the population were to come out with the demonstrably false nonsense the McCanns do they would've lost all public support. Even Clarrie has got in on the act - abduction is only a 'working hypothesis'. How clever of him when he fails to add the others. Kate has stated Maddie did not, nay COULD not wander out. That leaves one other possible scenario for the fact Maddie is no longer 'here'. It is PAINFULLY obvious what that third option is! I don't know how anyone can miss this!