Incitement

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Incitement

Post  Kololi on Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:05 am

tigger wrote:kololi wrote:


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
unquote

Just to break down this grammatically offensive statement:
I strongly believe in freedom of speech.
But there are people who are carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so.
(This seems to have lost something in translation - one cannot 'carry out an inaccuracy' one can be inaccurate in statements or writing).
These people have been shown to carry out inaccuracies and they must be accountable.
This phrase is meaningless - see above.
He doesn't mind 'purporting' theories, writing fiction or suggestions.
I take this to mean we may theorise.
We may write fiction (disclaimers in most fiction books based on known events already take care of that, we don't need Gerry's permission for that).
We may make suggestions.

But clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrenceThis last sentence I take to refer to the press, rather than any forum, this forum in particular is very keen on references and sources on which our theories or suggestions are based.







Actually Tigger, Kololi did not write this.

Kololi

Posts: 677
Join date: 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Incitement

Post  rainbow-fairy on Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:00 am

Basically, Gerry is saying he is perfectly happy for us to have theories as long as they agree with his. Hypocritical little worm.

rainbow-fairy

Posts: 1364
Join date: 2011-05-26
Age: 37
Location: going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Re: Incitement

Post  tigger on Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:52 pm

Kololi wrote:
tigger wrote:kololi wrote:


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
unquote

tigger wrote:
Just to break down this grammatically offensive statement:
I strongly believe in freedom of speech.
But there are people who are carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so.
(This seems to have lost something in translation - one cannot 'carry out an inaccuracy' one can be inaccurate in statements or writing).
These people have been shown to carry out inaccuracies and they must be accountable.
This phrase is meaningless - see above.
He doesn't mind 'purporting' theories, writing fiction or suggestions.
I take this to mean we may theorise.
We may write fiction (disclaimers in most fiction books based on known events already take care of that, we don't need Gerry's permission for that).
We may make suggestions.

But clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrenceThis last sentence I take to refer to the press, rather than any forum, this forum in particular is very keen on references and sources on which our theories or suggestions are based.







Actually Tigger, Kololi did not write this.


I apologise Kololi, GWbrother is the one I should have quoted. My apologies.

tigger

Posts: 2319
Join date: 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Incitement

Post  Kololi on Wed Feb 22, 2012 10:59 am

NP - easily done.

Kololi

Posts: 677
Join date: 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Re: Incitement

Post  Smokeandmirrors on Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:50 pm

wgbrother wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:People will always have different opinions it is true, and more people would not have such a dim view of the parents had they chosen a different path over the last few years. The fact is we have seen some pretty weird behaviour, there was even a letter ( I could probably locate and share) from one of the PJ investigating officers regarding the arrogance of the Tapas gang. When the PJ were trying to negotiate a reconstruction (the correspondence both ways is available for viewing) the Tapas were questioning the value of a reconstruction and as we all know refused to do it when they realised it was for the police to consolidate their statement rather than as a televised crime watch style feature. This demonstrated that far from being co-operative they wanted to dictate terms. The Investigating officer commented in a letter to the guy from Leicester Police how irregular it ws for witnesses to dictate the course of an investigation.

And it has been so all along. When the portugese police recommended that the McCanns could be endangering their daughters life by revealing the mark in her eye, Gerry remarked that it was too good a marketing ploy. Marketing then, rated higher on his "wider agenda" and he was willing to put his daughters life at great danger, effectively for a marketing ploy. Of course they denied making anything much of her eye on the Piers Morgan interview, despite posters, t-shirts etc and using it as a campaign logo for 2 yrs!

There are two among many, very valid reasons why many people don't think much of K and G. By their own words and actions, they have conducted a campaign which to many is hugely insulting both to their intelligence and for it's long list of hypocrisies.

Remember, Gerry said himself at the Leveson inquiry that he believed in freedom of speech and had no problem with people purporting theories, but has attempted to sue the arse of those who have done so backed up with evidence from the police files.

Anyway wgbrother/xavier/sans souci or whoever you are, thousands and thousands of members of the public have very valid reasons for feel in the way they do, most of which has come directly from the mouths of the Mc's themselves. The rest from the total and utter lack of any evidence within any published official documents to support the theory which they are purporting.


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.
not a partial recollection, but emphasising the most hypocritical part

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. Here's where I agree with Gerry, so why hasn't the Tapas gang been held to account for repeatedly producing conflicting information? Can't have your cake and eat it.I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence. So don't keep drawing attention to it by being litigious. Just ignore it

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up?Yes actually. I'm only a member of this forum, and this is one of many with large memberships. Plenty of people just in my acquaintance don't believe the Mc version, in fact I don't actually know anyone who does. If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now. And? Not everyone who doesn't believe the story is actively engaged or sufficiently interested to sign petitions etc

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always. No you are wrong. I only assumed you were because your style of trolling is so similar. I really don't give a hoot who disagrees with me, we are entitled to hold any view we choose.


I normally wouldn't even feed a troll but when a troll is so blatantly wrong on so many counts it leads to a strong case of lastworditis!

Smokeandmirrors

Posts: 267
Join date: 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 5 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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