What happened to Petert/joMc/jason...erm..Mike Gunnill?

by ufercoffy 25.07.10 0:36

ufercoffy wrote:
Mgunnill wrote:Dear Dick: are you starting to forget things again? It has been mentioned before, as you know- some by yourself or perhaps you forgot that as well! Magic

Erm...Jo certainly seems to be in cahoots with ~~Majic~~ Magic.

Just wish he would investigate Madeleine's disappearance. Guess he gets paid more by the CR's though for investigating forum posters.

Hey, Jo, what did you think of Stevo's interview about his new book yesterday?

What makes you think I am not investigating Madeleine's disappearance? With regarding the cheap comment about CR: you seem to think, you know a lot but then again you don't listen or remember. Reminds me of the way Bugalugs used to post.
Sorry again for calling you Dick, I didn't know then!

.....and about the book, I am not a fiction sort of bloke so I am not interested.

Does anyone know what happened to erm, Jo's campaign with majic?

by kangdang 25.07.10 0:38

Not heard a dicky bird. Are you/were you bugalugs1970 uffercoffy?

by ufercoffy 25.07.10 0:46

kangdang wrote:Not heard a dicky bird. Are you/were you bugalugs1970 uffercoffy?

What happened to Petert/joMc/jason...erm..Mike Gunnill? 145161

Nope. Are/were you?

by kangdang 25.07.10 13:56

No, not that I can recall, but hey, let the pro camp carry on speculating Wink

by Doceedo 25.07.10 14:24

ufercoffy wrote:

Does anyone know what happened to erm, Jo's campaign with majic?

Haven't a clue (didn't know there was one). His tweets can, on the odd occasion, be informative (after a fashion)

http://twitter.com/mikegunnill

by Judge Mental 25.07.10 19:34

kangdang wrote:No, not that I can recall, but hey, let the pro camp carry on speculating

What else would they have to chunner about on their websites? After all, there is rarely any mention of Madeleine herself.

Having said that, the McCanns friends and family warned them very early on that this case would end up being more about the two of them than their 3 years old daughter.

One would feel more willing to try and read these alternative sites if one thought there would be a thread or two where one could read their explanations or reasons for believing there had been an abduction. From what one has seen on here this week they seem to dedicate their lives to copying and pasting our posts within a couple of minutes of them appearing on our own board.

Tony Bennett has never seemed anything less than a genuinely decent and dedicated chap, and one applauds him enormously for his tenacious efforts in seeking justice for Madeleine, however, one does not dissect every letter of his postings and hang off his every word; and nor would one repeatedly plaster any site with photographs of him at every opportunity. There is something terribly distasteful and childish about adults behaving in this manner, and one seriously questions their motives as to why they would be so vehemently poisonous to the most vociferous posters whose only wish is to see Madeleine's case being unshelved.

What is it that they do not wish us to find about? Why do they have to make such asses of themselves in the process?

If they do not like what posters here are saying, why do they not do what royalty would do in this situation and simply bury their heads in the sand and ignore it all?