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 help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.


Jill Havern
Forum owner

Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Page 5 of 13 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11, 12, 13  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by aquila on 13.04.14 17:15

For me the why question is why they were all there on holiday together. I make no bones about not entertaining the swinging theory that Textusa speaks about.

What I'm very interested in is the empty CATS file, the person left out of the Crime Watch programmes, the person who suggested the holiday, the person who took a state of the art baby monitor, the person who allegedly didn't leave the table on the night of Madeleine's disappearance, the person who gave short shrift to Yvonne Martin, the person who said in a rogatory statement 'not the right forum'.

I'm not inferring anything at all. I'm saying that I'm very interested in this person.

aquila

Posts : 7957
Reputation : 1182
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Rasputin on 13.04.14 17:39

@aquila wrote:For me the why question is why they were all there on holiday together. I make no bones about not entertaining the swinging theory that Textusa speaks about.

What I'm very interested in is the empty CATS file, the person left out of the Crime Watch programmes, the person who suggested the holiday, the person who took a state of the art baby monitor, the person who allegedly didn't leave the table on the night of Madeleine's disappearance, the person who gave short shrift to Yvonne Martin, the person who said in a rogatory statement 'not the right forum'.

I'm not inferring anything at all. I'm saying that I'm very interested in this person.
The person who filmed that odd moment with gerry swearing infront of children and other holiday makers on an airport bus .

____________________
"I'm not buying it" Wendy Murphy

Rasputin

Posts : 269
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Halfwit on 13.04.14 18:25

@Rasputin wrote:
@aquila wrote:For me the why question is why they were all there on holiday together. I make no bones about not entertaining the swinging theory that Textusa speaks about.

What I'm very interested in is the empty CATS file, the person left out of the Crime Watch programmes, the person who suggested the holiday, the person who took a state of the art baby monitor, the person who allegedly didn't leave the table on the night of Madeleine's disappearance, the person who gave short shrift to Yvonne Martin, the person who said in a rogatory statement 'not the right forum'.

I'm not inferring anything at all. I'm saying that I'm very interested in this person.
The person who filmed that odd moment with gerry swearing infront of children and other holiday makers on an airport bus .


And who was presumably the person who uploaded it to YouTube for the world to see.

Halfwit

Posts : 87
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-01-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by canada12 on 13.04.14 18:29

@Halfwit wrote:
@Rasputin wrote:
@aquila wrote:For me the why question is why they were all there on holiday together. I make no bones about not entertaining the swinging theory that Textusa speaks about.

What I'm very interested in is the empty CATS file, the person left out of the Crime Watch programmes, the person who suggested the holiday, the person who took a state of the art baby monitor, the person who allegedly didn't leave the table on the night of Madeleine's disappearance, the person who gave short shrift to Yvonne Martin, the person who said in a rogatory statement 'not the right forum'.

I'm not inferring anything at all. I'm saying that I'm very interested in this person.
The person who filmed that odd moment with gerry swearing infront of children and other holiday makers on an airport bus .


And who was presumably the person who uploaded it to YouTube for the world to see.

Might it have been a warning to Gerry...?

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 193
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Hicks on 13.04.14 18:33

The one who later remembered that he HAD seen Madeleine the night she went missing, all ready for bed looking peaceful.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by AndyB on 14.04.14 8:51

@HelenMeg wrote:Hi - an interesting response from Textusa to the question posed by anonymous regarding Smithman:
There's a different take on the whole article here, but be warned, the language is strong: http://nottextusa.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/so-what-hell-is-this-old-pile-of.html

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by tigger on 14.04.14 9:19

@AndyB wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Hi - an interesting response from Textusa to the question posed by anonymous regarding Smithman:
There's a different take on the whole article here, but be warned, the language is strong: http://nottextusa.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/so-what-hell-is-this-old-pile-of.html

It's funny and very true - mostly anyway. As it happens, I do believe the Smith sighting was the result of Gerry's brilliant plan, it's completely in character. I also believe that the pseudo science and needless verbosity detracts from some useful points of view in many of the articles. I rarely read it for that reason. Very useful on the relative speed of trains though, if one's interested in such puzzles.

 spit coffee 

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Snifferdog on 14.04.14 10:40

@tigger wrote:
@AndyB wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Hi - an interesting response from Textusa to the question posed by anonymous regarding Smithman:
There's a different take on the whole article here, but be warned, the language is strong: http://nottextusa.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/so-what-hell-is-this-old-pile-of.html

It's funny and very true - mostly anyway. As it happens, I do believe the Smith sighting was the result of  Gerry's brilliant plan, it's completely in character. I also believe that the pseudo science and needless verbosity  detracts from some useful points of view in many of the articles. I rarely read it  for that reason. Very useful on the relative speed of trains though, if one's interested in such puzzles.

 spit coffee 
I can attest to the fact that Textusa will not allow posts that have other points of view other than her own. Her mind is closed and made up come what may.
I have said before she has made some good posts, but her writing style tends to cloud the subject by not being concise and to the point. I find the too many bolded letters make the post irritating to read.

Textusa has a way getting the message across that were it not for narrow minded people on this earth, who find swinging distasteful, the Mccanns and friends would have had nothing to cover up, (albeit the part of her theory where Madeleine discovers her mother and Payne in a compromising situation. This causes Kate to fatally lash out at her daughter, ala Joana Cipriano).

I just wish to make it clear that although I find the act of swinging repugnant, we all know it happens so why would people who feel the same way be unduly shocked by a few swinging doctors? So shocked that it necessitates a cover up of such magnitude.

I have decided that I will not make the effort to post on her blog again, as she mostly only posts the writings of those who agree with ALL her theories, or those who follow her every word and pay her effusive compliments.

Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 11:14

Textusa believes in her theory and backs up her theory. No-one is forced to go to her blog site. I just pointed out that she had added another post. Every time I do that, there  is a stream of criticism of her writing style, posts  etc. If individuals don't agree with her or like her style then I would wonder why such individuals bother to go and read it. Or ios it just to be able to have another go at her? Seeing how people react to her posts  - , I would hazard a guess it is very close to the truth at times judging by how it elicits such a magnitude of criticism.  laughat

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 11:22

I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 11:32

Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Halfwit on 14.04.14 11:45

Thanks AndyB that gave me a good laugh.

Halfwit

Posts : 87
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-01-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by AndyB on 14.04.14 11:51

@HelenMeg wrote:Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.
No it isn't. If I make nasty comments about a website that denies that the holocaust happened, or one that advocates paedophilia does that make that website true? Textusa is entitled to their opinion but that is all it is, an opinion, and when they refuse to accept that there may be alternative views to the extent that adverse comments get deleted, then they deserve the criticism. (See Snifferdog's comment above and this)

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by tigger on 14.04.14 11:55

@HelenMeg wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

Many hours have been spent trying to find the truth here too. So far I have not seen Textusa mocked personally, only on the content of the blog. Textusa will not entertain any other theory than the 'swinging'. Which is short-sighted considering that there are many other options and it does not explain all the known facts.

So anyone who mocks Textusa you say, seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons and trying to deflect away from the truth. Which truth? Swinging doctors as Textusa will have it? Since I do not believe that, in fact find it ridiculous, I too must be purposely deflecting from the 'Truth'.  
I understand that Jatyk also comes in for a fair bit of ridicule, so are they likely to come under the heading of one who is hitting the nail on the head?

Many blogs have been quoted here, just not with such religious fervour as the supporters of Textusa. The reasoned analyses of Dr. Roberts, the OnlyinAmerica blog, Lazzeriliesinthesun, Steel Magnolias and others. Textusa less so because afaik they've disabled cut and paste.

Although lately complete articles have been copied, plus long lists of comments. Such as this one from an earlier page.

Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
HelenMeg,
We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6458p480-mccanns-hire-car-contract

Which topic iirc was started some considerable time ago by JD and others.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 25
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 12:04

@AndyB wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.
No it isn't. If I make nasty comments about a website that denies that the holocaust happened, or one that advocates paedophilia does that make that website true? Textusa is entitled to their opinion but that is all it is, an opinion, and when they refuse to accept that there may be alternative views to the extent that adverse comments get deleted, then they deserve the criticism. (See Snifferdog's comment above and this)
I said ' is likely to be hitting the nail on the head'  - of course there are websites out there who are telling ridiculous untruth's and deserve being mocked / sneered at. Textusa site is not a discussion forum or debating area  - it is a blog site where she is trying to find the truth.  She is only giving her opinion and theory. She attempts to answer challenges but she is simply trying to find the truth - a truth that she can justify and believe in. There is no rule saying you have to believe Textusa or visit the blog once a week.  I guess there is no rule saying you cant read it and criticize it or mock it over at this forum either, so basically
it doesnt really matter what people here say about it smilie  It wont affect the PJ / SY in their investigations. After all, there are plenty of different theories suggested  here and on other sites that people can laugh at too. Thinking about it, you are absolutely right Andy. I was just being super sensitive as it is my period!

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 12:07

@HelenMeg wrote:
@AndyB wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.
No it isn't. If I make nasty comments about a website that denies that the holocaust happened, or one that advocates paedophilia does that make that website true? Textusa is entitled to their opinion but that is all it is, an opinion, and when they refuse to accept that there may be alternative views to the extent that adverse comments get deleted, then they deserve the criticism. (See Snifferdog's comment above and this)
I said ' is likely to be hitting the nail on the head'  - of course there are websites out there who are telling ridiculous untruth's and deserve being mocked / sneered at. Textusa site is not a discussion forum or debating area  - it is a blog site where she is trying to find the truth.  She is only giving her opinion and theory. She attempts to answer challenges but she is simply trying to find the truth - a truth that she can justify and believe in. There is no rule saying you have to believe Textusa or visit the blog once a week.  I guess there is no rule saying you cant read it and criticize it or mock it over at this forum either, so basically
it doesnt really matter what people here say about it smilie  It wont affect the PJ / SY in their investigations. After all, there are plenty of different theories suggested  here and on other sites that people can laugh at too. Thinking about it, you are absolutely right Andy. I was just being super sensitive as it is my period!
Actually sorry - it is not my period - it is the lead up to my period . Females out there will understand that the lead up to period time is not the best. Males out there probably circle such dates on your calendars - not mine you understand but your wives / partners / girlfriends unless you are gay.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Snifferdog on 14.04.14 12:33

friends Seconded

Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 12:36

Ladyinred wrote:For HelenMeg:
 roses
Thanks LIR - thats appreciated.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by HelenMeg on 14.04.14 12:54

@tigger wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

Many hours have been spent trying to find the truth here too. So far I have not seen Textusa mocked personally, only on the content of the blog. Textusa will not entertain any other theory than the 'swinging'. Which is short-sighted considering that there are many other options and it does not explain all the known facts.

So anyone who mocks Textusa you say, seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons and trying to deflect away from the truth. Which truth? Swinging doctors as Textusa will have it? Since I do not believe that, in fact find it ridiculous, I too must be purposely deflecting from the 'Truth'.  
I understand that Jatyk also comes in for a fair bit of ridicule, so are they likely to come under the heading of one who is hitting the nail on the head?

Many blogs have been quoted here, just not with such religious fervour as the supporters of Textusa. The reasoned analyses of Dr. Roberts, the OnlyinAmerica blog, Lazzeriliesinthesun, Steel Magnolias and others. Textusa less so because afaik they've disabled cut and paste.

Although lately complete articles have been copied, plus long lists of comments. Such as this one from an earlier page.

Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
HelenMeg,
We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6458p480-mccanns-hire-car-contract

Which topic iirc was started some considerable time ago by JD and others.
You find swinging doctors ridiculous - I find paedophilia as theory for the disappearance of Madeleine ridiculous. I find swinging plausible - you dont. So what? It doesn't matter one tiny bit as SY and PJ aren't too worried about what you or I think. I only discovered the Textusa blogsite a few months ago and I quickly started to realise it did not seem to be very popular here and therefore made an active effort not to mention it too much. Once, when I mentioned there was a NEW post on Blacksmith Bureau I was pm'd to say that it doesn't go down very well here on this site, and best try not to refer to it....  so I stopped mentioning that.
Give me a chance - although I was there on 3arguidos and Mirror forums I'm relatively new here and haven't quite got the gist about who likes what and who doesnt!!  I think it is quite possible this whole affair is grounded in Money / Greed / property development based with a few Leicestershire based business men. But I dont mind who agrees / disagrees - its a discussion forum. But as long as everyone shows respect to other posters I dont see theres any problem - life's too short to create problems in a forum! So apologies if Ive said anything you dont like or disagree with because lets face it, the Mc Canns love a good argument on the forums. high5

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 199
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 14:22

Hope you are feeling better quickly HelenMeg  roses .  I really enjoy your posts and I think your observations about business connections are really interesting.  Money being the root of all evil and all that .... I don't know about the swinging theory, I just think there has just got to be more to it than that, but who knows.  We are all only trying to make sense of this case and well, if we all agreed there wouldn't be a forum would there.  And at least you haven't caused the rumpus I (completely unintentionally did) I have been in Westminster ever since  Shocked

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by rainbow-fairy on 14.04.14 17:50

N
@HelenMeg wrote:
@tigger wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

Many hours have been spent trying to find the truth here too. So far I have not seen Textusa mocked personally, only on the content of the blog. Textusa will not entertain any other theory than the 'swinging'. Which is short-sighted considering that there are many other options and it does not explain all the known facts.

So anyone who mocks Textusa you say, seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons and trying to deflect away from the truth. Which truth? Swinging doctors as Textusa will have it? Since I do not believe that, in fact find it ridiculous, I too must be purposely deflecting from the 'Truth'.  
I understand that Jatyk also comes in for a fair bit of ridicule, so are they likely to come under the heading of one who is hitting the nail on the head?

Many blogs have been quoted here, just not with such religious fervour as the supporters of Textusa. The reasoned analyses of Dr. Roberts, the OnlyinAmerica blog, Lazzeriliesinthesun, Steel Magnolias and others. Textusa less so because afaik they've disabled cut and paste.

Although lately complete articles have been copied, plus long lists of comments. Such as this one from an earlier page.

Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
HelenMeg,
We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6458p480-mccanns-hire-car-contract

Which topic iirc was started some considerable time ago by JD and others.
You find swinging doctors ridiculous - I find paedophilia as theory for the disappearance of Madeleine ridiculous. I find swinging plausible - you dont. So what? It doesn't matter one tiny bit as SY and PJ aren't too worried about what you or I think. I only discovered the Textusa blogsite a few months ago and I quickly started to realise it did not seem to be very popular here and therefore made an active effort not to mention it too much. Once, when I mentioned there was a NEW post on Blacksmith Bureau I was pm'd to say that it doesn't go down very well here on this site, and best try not to refer to it....  so I stopped mentioning that.
Give me a chance - although I was there on 3arguidos and Mirror forums I'm relatively new here and haven't quite got the gist about who likes what and who doesnt!!  I think it is quite possible this whole affair is grounded in Money / Greed / property development based with a few Leicestershire based business men. But I dont mind who agrees / disagrees - its a discussion forum. But as long as everyone shows respect to other posters I dont see theres any problem - life's too short to create problems in a forum! So apologies if Ive said anything you dont like or disagree with because lets face it, the Mc Canns love a good argument on the forums. high5
I am interested why you find the idea of paedophilia as a reason for a cover-up ridiculous, but swinging doctors plausible as a reason?
I find the 'idea' of swinging doctors totally plausible - what I don't is a cover-up for that reason.
I have seen it suggested that the references to paedophilia are some kind of 'red herring'. To my mind this is crazy; yes a red herring by nature is there to divert, but would you really divert from a lesser offence with probably the most heinous, abominable crime most of us could name? I don't think so, myself. It makes no logical sense.
If, for example, the children were left alone (neglect) - (I don't subscribe to that view personally, but that's neither here nor there), the group used something to get their children to sleep; the group enjoyed a bit of 'how's yer father' with other childrens fathers not their own - we are supposed to believe they would sooner be viewed as possible child molesters? I would rather be accused of pretty much *anything* than that! There is after all a reason that there are nonce wings in prison, and the worst will be segregated for their own safety - they are the lowest of the low in prison, scum of the earth.
Ok, maybe I have the morals of an alleycat lol, but I find nothing wrong in swinging - what *consenting adults* get up to, as long as its vaguely legal, bothers me not a jot (the idea does nothing for me, but). Frankly, were I to find out that my GP, or MP, dressed up in a gimp mask and heels to swing with their patients/constituents partners it might make them more interesting laughat
I also know of nobody who finds swinging shocking... I'm sure there are some people that do, but it just doesn't, on its own, warrant such a cover-up. Just my opinion...

But back to Textusa. I don't think its very fair to say that those who disagree or criticise are deflecting, or 'not here for the truth'. I have been a member here since 2011, and a long-time lurker by default of no phone that would post, for a long time before that, reading, weighing up and debating various theories.
I carefully re-read this entire thread yesterday, and have read Textusa's blog also.
What I have a problem with, is that *yes*, their theory *is* backed up, but every single piece of evidential reasoning could just as easily point to paedophilia as swinging imo.
Eg, John Lowe's 'careful wording' of the report into the 'semen stain' which could only bing e a semen stain IF the donor was NOT 2years old - inferrence being it WAS a semen stain. Fair enough. But HOW does that indicate swinging only? It could just as easily indicate paedophilia.
So too 'the cover-up and assistance' possible, but not proven - and imo more likely for paedophilia than swinging for the reasons I've outlined already.
One piece of the theory - the 'adult pool not getting a mention' is, to me, bizarre in the least. From what we know of the weather that week (records), it was hardly outdoor swimming weather! Even Kate said about the cold pool water in her account of the truth. Even IF they HAD used the adult pool, but not mentioned it, how is that an indicator of swinging? For me, that is a leap too far to even make sense.

As far as 'getting to the truth' - well I'm not so sure of that! On this forum we are free to weigh up and test different theories, and discard those that clearly can't fit. In my mind, rigidly sticking to, and promoting only one theory, is that *blogs* truth. That doesn't make it 'THE truth'
In fact, and I have never wondered this before, I am now questioning just why the swinging theory is pushed so hard to the exclusion of anything else even being considered..... (And those of us who don't subscribe to it are almost ridiculed for our stupidity, our 'biindness' and ignorance), there seems to be no 'I may be wrong, this is only a theory' option, just 'I am right, and if you don't go along with every word, then you are wrong'
Very dogmatic..

All that said, I would like nothing better than for Textusa, or anybody else for that matter, to convince me this was covered up for swinging reasons - far more palatable than the conclusion I have come to, but that would take more than a few pointers which are not whichever way I look, definitive but rather indicative. Equally indicative to other - and when coupled with the Gaspar statements, CATS file, numerous references to such activity, page 129 (graphically) and others in the 'madeleine', disturbing toned photos - point further in that direction.

Only my opinion though, and I suppose its not impossible that the two activities were both happening?

Errrm, like tigger said, maybe I should be prepared for a dishonorable mention now..... I'll live Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Snifferdog on 14.04.14 18:03

@rainbow-fairy wrote:                                                                       N
@HelenMeg wrote:
@tigger wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

Many hours have been spent trying to find the truth here too. So far I have not seen Textusa mocked personally, only on the content of the blog. Textusa will not entertain any other theory than the 'swinging'. Which is short-sighted considering that there are many other options and it does not explain all the known facts.

So anyone who mocks Textusa you say, seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons and trying to deflect away from the truth. Which truth? Swinging doctors as Textusa will have it? Since I do not believe that, in fact find it ridiculous, I too must be purposely deflecting from the 'Truth'.  
I understand that Jatyk also comes in for a fair bit of ridicule, so are they likely to come under the heading of one who is hitting the nail on the head?

Many blogs have been quoted here, just not with such religious fervour as the supporters of Textusa. The reasoned analyses of Dr. Roberts, the OnlyinAmerica blog, Lazzeriliesinthesun, Steel Magnolias and others. Textusa less so because afaik they've disabled cut and paste.

Although lately complete articles have been copied, plus long lists of comments. Such as this one from an earlier page.

Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
HelenMeg,
We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6458p480-mccanns-hire-car-contract

Which topic iirc was started some considerable time ago by JD and others.
You find swinging doctors ridiculous - I find paedophilia as theory for the disappearance of Madeleine ridiculous. I find swinging plausible - you dont. So what? It doesn't matter one tiny bit as SY and PJ aren't too worried about what you or I think. I only discovered the Textusa blogsite a few months ago and I quickly started to realise it did not seem to be very popular here and therefore made an active effort not to mention it too much. Once, when I mentioned there was a NEW post on Blacksmith Bureau I was pm'd to say that it doesn't go down very well here on this site, and best try not to refer to it....  so I stopped mentioning that.
Give me a chance - although I was there on 3arguidos and Mirror forums I'm relatively new here and haven't quite got the gist about who likes what and who doesnt!!  I think it is quite possible this whole affair is grounded in Money / Greed / property development based with a few Leicestershire based business men. But I dont mind who agrees / disagrees - its a discussion forum. But as long as everyone shows respect to other posters I dont see theres any problem - life's too short to create problems in a forum! So apologies if Ive said anything you dont like or disagree with because lets face it, the Mc Canns love a good argument on the forums. high5
I am interested why you find the idea of paedophilia as a reason for a cover-up ridiculous, but swinging doctors plausible as a reason?
I find the 'idea' of swinging doctors totally plausible - what I don't is a cover-up for that reason.
I have seen it suggested that the references to paedophilia are some kind of 'red herring'. To my mind this is crazy; yes a red herring by nature is there to divert, but would you really divert from a lesser offence with probably the most heinous, abominable crime most of us could name? I don't think so, myself. It makes no logical sense.
If, for example, the children were left alone (neglect) - (I don't subscribe to that view personally, but that's neither here nor there), the group used something to get their children to sleep; the group enjoyed a bit of 'how's yer father' with other childrens fathers not their own - we are supposed to believe they would sooner be viewed as possible child molesters? I would rather be accused of pretty much *anything* than that! There is after all a reason that there are nonce wings in prison, and the worst will be segregated for their own safety - they are the lowest of the low in prison, scum of the earth.
Ok, maybe I have the morals of an alleycat lol, but I find nothing wrong in swinging - what *consenting adults* get up to, as long as its vaguely legal, bothers me not a jot (the idea does nothing for me, but). Frankly, were I to find out that my GP, or MP, dressed up in a gimp mask and heels to swing with their patients/constituents partners it might make them more interesting laughat
I also know of nobody who finds swinging shocking... I'm sure there are some people that do, but it just doesn't, on its own, warrant such a cover-up. Just my opinion...

But back to Textusa. I don't think its very fair to say that those who disagree or criticise are deflecting, or 'not here for the truth'. I have been a member here since 2011, and a long-time lurker by default of no phone that would post, for a long time before that, reading, weighing up and debating various theories.
I carefully re-read this entire thread yesterday, and have read Textusa's blog also.
What I have a problem with, is that *yes*, their theory *is* backed up, but every single piece of evidential reasoning could just as easily point to paedophilia as swinging imo.
Eg, John Lowe's 'careful wording' of the report into the 'semen stain' which could only bing e a semen stain IF the donor was NOT 2years old - inferrence being it WAS a semen stain. Fair enough. But HOW does that indicate swinging only? It could just as easily indicate paedophilia.
So too 'the cover-up and assistance' possible, but not proven - and imo more likely for paedophilia than swinging for the reasons I've outlined already.
One piece of the theory - the 'adult pool not getting a mention' is, to me, bizarre in the least. From what we know of the weather that week (records), it was hardly outdoor swimming weather! Even Kate said about the cold pool water in her account of the truth. Even IF they HAD used the adult pool, but not mentioned it, how is that an indicator of swinging? For me, that is a leap too far to even make sense.

As far as 'getting to the truth' - well I'm not so sure of that! On this forum we are free to weigh up and test different theories, and discard those that clearly can't fit. In my mind, rigidly sticking to, and promoting only one theory, is that *blogs* trutthe h. That doesn't make it 'THE truth'
In fact, and I have never wondered this before, I am now questioning just why the swinging theory is pushed so hard to the exclusion of anything else even being considered..... (And those of us who don't subscribe to it are almost ridiculed for our stupidity, our 'biindness' and ignorance), there seems to be no 'I may be wrong, this is only a theory' option, just 'I am right, and if you don't go along with every word, then you are wrong'
Very dogmatic..

All that said, I would like nothing better than for Textusa, or anybody else for that matter, to convince me this was covered up for swinging reasons - far more palatable than the conclusion I have come to, but that would take more than a few pointers which are not whichever way I look, definitive but rather indicative. Equally indicative to other - and when coupled with the Gaspar statements, CATS file, numerous references to such activity, page 129 (graphiically) and others in the 'madeleine', disturbing toned photos - point further in that direction.

Only my opinion though, and I suppose its not impossible that the two activities were both happening?

Errrm, like tigger said, maybe I should be prepared for a dishonorable mention now..... I'll live Wink
Excellent post Rainbow Fairy. You have summed it up:high5:  so well. Bravo!

Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by Snifferdog on 14.04.14 18:13

@rainbow-fairy wrote:                                                                       N
@HelenMeg wrote:
@tigger wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:I once read somewhere the theory that Textusa writes such extremely long-winded posts, is to bore CR off their pants. And that only people, who are really interested, will read them till the very end, where conclusions can be made, as CR will have gone off already to check another forum   winkwink


Maybe so!!

It just reminds me of the situation with Eddie and Keela and the Mc Canns.  If the Mc Canns were really bothered in finding out what had really happened to their daughter , when hearing of the results of Eddie and Keela's sniffing they would have been saying ' OMG whose blood is it? Did someone harm Madeleine? etc etc ''. Instead of which they just made comments such as..'dogs not reliable / cant believe the dogs / d'you really think we killed our daughter / find the body etc etc etc ".


You would think everyone here and on other 'truth-seeking' forums would welcome blog sites that attempted  to discover the truth and spend many hours trying to work out what happened. You would think that people would appreciate others' hard work, even if they had different theories or could not agree with elements of theories being suggested.  I would not expect a barrage of criticism, mocking and not particularly nice comments from people who were genuinely trying to establish justice for Madeleine.
Therefore those that mock Textusa or any other similar site putting forward theories as to what happened, would seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons but are trying to deflect away from the truth. Any forum or blog that elicits much criticism or sarcasm or nasty comments is likely to be one who is hitting the nail on the head. Thats just logical.

Many hours have been spent trying to find the truth here too. So far I have not seen Textusa mocked personally, only on the content of the blog. Textusa will not entertain any other theory than the 'swinging'. Which is short-sighted considering that there are many other options and it does not explain all the known facts.

So anyone who mocks Textusa you say, seem to be people who are not here for the right reasons and trying to deflect away from the truth. Which truth? Swinging doctors as Textusa will have it? Since I do not believe that, in fact find it ridiculous, I too must be purposely deflecting from the 'Truth'.  
I understand that Jatyk also comes in for a fair bit of ridicule, so are they likely to come under the heading of one who is hitting the nail on the head?

Many blogs have been quoted here, just not with such religious fervour as the supporters of Textusa. The reasoned analyses of Dr. Roberts, the OnlyinAmerica blog, Lazzeriliesinthesun, Steel Magnolias and others. Textusa less so because afaik they've disabled cut and paste.

Although lately complete articles have been copied, plus long lists of comments. Such as this one from an earlier page.

Textusa1 Mar 2014 18:47:00
HelenMeg,
We would like to express our thanks to you and your great work at JH which we are obviously following.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t6458p480-mccanns-hire-car-contract

Which topic iirc was started some considerable time ago by JD and others.
You find swinging doctors ridiculous - I find paedophilia as theory for the disappearance of Madeleine ridiculous. I find swinging plausible - you dont. So what? It doesn't matter one tiny bit as SY and PJ aren't too worried about what you or I think. I only discovered the Textusa blogsite a few months ago and I quickly started to realise it did not seem to be very popular here and therefore made an active effort not to mention it too much. Once, when I mentioned there was a NEW post on Blacksmith Bureau I was pm'd to say that it doesn't go down very well here on this site, and best try not to refer to it....  so I stopped mentioning that.
Give me a chance - although I was there on 3arguidos and Mirror forums I'm relatively new here and haven't quite got the gist about who likes what and who doesnt!!  I think it is quite possible this whole affair is grounded in Money / Greed / property development based with a few Leicestershire based business men. But I dont mind who agrees / disagrees - its a discussion forum. But as long as everyone shows respect to other posters I dont see theres any problem - life's too short to create problems in a forum! So apologies if Ive said anything you dont like or disagree with because lets face it, the Mc Canns love a good argument on the forums. high5
I am interested why you find the idea of paedophilia as a reason for a cover-up ridiculous, but swinging doctors plausible as a reason?
I find the 'idea' of swinging doctors totally plausible - what I don't is a cover-up for that reason.
I have seen it suggested that the references to paedophilia are some kind of 'red herring'. To my mind this is crazy; yes a red herring by nature is there to divert, but would you really divert from a lesser offence with probably the most heinous, abominable crime most of us could name? I don't think so, myself. It makes no logical sense.
If, for example, the children were left alone (neglect) - (I don't subscribe to that view personally, but that's neither here nor there), the group used something to get their children to sleep; the group enjoyed a bit of 'how's yer father' with other childrens fathers not their own - we are supposed to believe they would sooner be viewed as possible child molesters? I would rather be accused of pretty much *anything* than that! There is after all a reason that there are nonce wings in prison, and the worst will be segregated for their own safety - they are the lowest of the low in prison, scum of the earth.
Ok, maybe I have the morals of an alleycat lol, but I find nothing wrong in swinging - what *consenting adults* get up to, as long as its vaguely legal, bothers me not a jot (the idea does nothing for me, but). Frankly, were I to find out that my GP, or MP, dressed up in a gimp mask and heels to swing with their patients/constituents partners it might make them more interesting laughat
I also know of nobody who finds swinging shocking... I'm sure there are some people that do, but it just doesn't, on its own, warrant such a cover-up. Just my opinion...

But back to Textusa. I don't think its very fair to say that those who disagree or criticise are deflecting, or 'not here for the truth'. I have been a member here since 2011, and a long-time lurker by default of no phone that would post, for a long time before that, reading, weighing up and debating various theories.
I carefully re-read this entire thread yesterday, and have read Textusa's blog also.
What I have a problem with, is that *yes*, their theory *is* backed up, but every single piece of evidential reasoning could just as easily point to paedophilia as swinging imo.
Eg, John Lowe's 'careful wording' of the report into the 'semen stain' which could only bing e a semen stain IF the donor was NOT 2years old - inferrence being it WAS a semen stain. Fair enough. But HOW does that indicate swinging only? It could just as easily indicate paedophilia.
So too 'the cover-up and assistance' possible, but not proven - and imo more likely for paedophilia than swinging for the reasons I've outlined already.
One piece of the theory - the 'adult pool not getting a mention' is, to me, bizarre in the least. From what we know of the weather that week (records), it was hardly outdoor swimming weather! Even Kate said about the cold pool water in her account of the truth. Even IF they HAD used the adult pool, but not mentioned it, how is that an indicator of swinging? For me, that is a leap too far to even make sense.

As far as 'getting to the truth' - well I'm not so sure of that! On this forum we are free to weigh up and test different theories, and discard those that clearly can't fit. In my mind, rigidly sticking to, and promoting only one theory, is that *blogs* trutthe h. That doesn't make it 'THE truth'
In fact, and I have never wondered this before, I am now questioning just why the swinging theory is pushed so hard to the exclusion of anything else even being considered..... (And those of us who don't subscribe to it are almost ridiculed for our stupidity, our 'biindness' and ignorance), there seems to be no 'I may be wrong, this is only a theory' option, just 'I am right, and if you don't go along with every word, then you are wrong'
Very dogmatic..

All that said, I would like nothing better than for Textusa, or anybody else for that matter, to convince me this was covered up for swinging reasons - far more palatable than the conclusion I have come to, but that would take more than a few pointers which are not whichever way I look, definitive but rather indicative. Equally indicative to other - and when coupled with the Gaspar statements, CATS file, numerous references to such activity, page 129 (graphiically) and others in the 'madeleine', disturbing toned photos - point further in that direction.

Only my opinion though, and I suppose its not impossible that the two activities were both happening?

Errrm, like tigger said, maybe I should be prepared for a dishonorable mention now..... I'll live Wink
Rainbow Fairy, I think you have explained it so well.

Snifferdog

Posts : 1008
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2012-05-11
Location : here

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Latest textusa blogspot UPDATE - New blog Bombshelling re Goncalo Amaral on Page 22.

Post by rainbow-fairy on 14.04.14 18:20

@Snifferdog wrote: Excellent post Rainbow Fairy. You have summed it up:  high5 :  so well. Bravo!

Thank you Snifferdog :) Obviously I got over what I meant - I thought I might have rambled too much lol Wink

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra Felgueiras



Truth is artless and innocent - like the eloquence of nature, it is clothed with simplicity and easy persuasion; always open to investigation and analysis, it seeks exposure because it fears not detection.

NORMAN MACDONALD, Maxims and Moral Reflections.

rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 42
Location : going round in circles

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 13 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11, 12, 13  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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