I think the number of pros outweigh the antis considerably

by Jolie 27.12.09 18:23

This forum is overwhelmingly populated with those who believe or, at least, promote the abduction theory. All too often, they resort to insults, ridicule, and badgering to try and annoy those persons they disagree with. It's difficult to have discussions with persons trying to belittle you, although I suspect fruitful discussion is not the aim of many of them.

by Guest 27.12.09 18:24

Jolie wrote:
Aristocrat wrote:I asked for the article!

Damn, how many rude people there are on this forum! Didn't your mother teach you any manners? That's why I leave this forum for long periods and don't post here often. No evidence of civility in so many posters that come here and attack those they disagree with. I try to be patient and ignore it, but they give off a bad smell, stinking up the joint.

Ok, fair enough.

I asked for the article, please, as I can't find it.

by Guest 27.12.09 18:24

Jolie wrote:
tyra wrote:To be fair it should have been mr bennett providing the information as it was his initial assertion, it shouldn't be left to the rest of us to try and work out where he has got something from and what context it is in and what it all means, as i said before, big enough and ugly enough to do it himself really.
But seeing as how it has been found and it took place in 2007 and not 2009 as mr bennett initially claimed. This was presumeably conducted in english and then translated into portuguese and then back again?

We haven't seen what you look like, not that a person's natural appearance should matter in matters of debate.

Resorting to insults is petty. Try sticking to discussion without them if you want to be thought of as a responsible person.

You are not Tony bennett are you? it's just that you two seem to be the only people who have not heard this saying before and decide to take it literally, it's a saying *sigh* not an insult, trust me if i wanting to insult someone then I would do so, with flair and panache! big grin

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 18:25

You know Jolie, I disagree, I see something else, but if that is your view it's valid.

by Guest 27.12.09 18:25

Jolie wrote:This forum is overwhelmingly populated with those who believe or, at least, promote the abduction theory. All too often, they resort to insults, ridicule, and badgering to try and annoy those persons they disagree with. It's difficult to have discussions with persons trying to belittle you, although I suspect fruitful discussion is not the aim of many of them.

Fruitful discussion is the ONLY aim I have, I just can't be doing with liars and people perpetuating known myths and this place is crawling with them.

by Guest 27.12.09 18:31

Jolie wrote:This forum is overwhelmingly populated with those who believe or, at least, promote the abduction theory. All too often, they resort to insults, ridicule, and badgering to try and annoy those persons they disagree with. It's difficult to have discussions with persons trying to belittle you, although I suspect fruitful discussion is not the aim of many of them.

Well it works both ways Jolie, like this

Autumn wrote:'the abductor who they believe snatched her' :ambersuz: :ambersuz: :ambersuz:

Oh please, Trya, change the record.

by Slartibartfast 27.12.09 18:35

Jolie wrote:This forum is overwhelmingly populated with those who believe or, at least, promote the abduction theory. All too often, they resort to insults, ridicule, and badgering to try and annoy those persons they disagree with. It's difficult to have discussions with persons trying to belittle you, although I suspect fruitful discussion is not the aim of many of them.

You just don't like people disagreeing with you.
I had Jypsybear insulting me even though I had not even engaged with her/him.
It cuts both ways.

by Jolie 27.12.09 18:36

tyra wrote:
Jolie wrote:This forum is overwhelmingly populated with those who believe or, at least, promote the abduction theory. All too often, they resort to insults, ridicule, and badgering to try and annoy those persons they disagree with. It's difficult to have discussions with persons trying to belittle you, although I suspect fruitful discussion is not the aim of many of them.

Fruitful discussion is the ONLY aim I have, I just can't be doing with liars and people perpetuating known myths and this place is crawling with them.

Yes, and many of those people are McCann parent sympathizer/protectors. The place is swarming with them and they are great at playing victims. Take a look at the member list, if you don't think it's true. Click on the statistics to read the posts of the people who are posting here. How many doubt the abduction theory will you find? Maybe 5, or 7, out of more than 100 members? I can name most of them, I think: Jolie (me), Bennett, jhk, ruby, autumn, sym (now deleted), smith (now deleted)...who am I missing?

Have fun with your game playing, I've got better things to do with the rest of my day/life.

Tony, you'd be better off using your website to publish your writing for everyone to read, if you don't want to be continually subjected to abuse from people who disagree with you and are trying to shut you up. You're not perfect, I'm not perfect, and I'm sure the rest of them aren't perfect, but we all have a right to express our opinions. What we aren't required to do is share the same forum space as those we disagree with.

If you all enjoy jousting this way, have at it. I do think it's a waste of time, at this point. People are set in their mind on their perspective on this case. The debate is no longer honest, as those that remain on the believing side are unwilling to consider anything that reflects negatively on the beloved McCann parents.

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 18:49

No, not true.

The same can be argued the other way, Jolie.

by MaryB 27.12.09 19:04

Sorry I feel the same way.

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 19:15

It's still my view that it is incorrect.
May I ask, were you both formerly members of the 3arguidos?

by Guest 27.12.09 19:42

Jolie,

This is a far too serious subject for game playing.

We have all seen what happened to 3A.
I'm not talking about what's happened behind the screens, which in itself is too worse for words.

I am talking about the forum and its members. Members who are or have been supporting each other congenial, reinforced each other in their arguments and the line that went right through there was: the parents have done it.
Even after July 2008 and the publication of the PJ files.
It was a hate forum. In my view this was the most despicable forum ever appeared on the Internet.
Someone with a balanced view was completed ripped of from his or hers dignity and under loud cheers from the forum they were banned. It was a brainwash forum.

Would you like to return to a forum like 3A?

After July 28 2008 and after the PJ files were known, people could, with their own eyes read what has been investigated and what came out. The fact is that there is no evidence that the parents were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine or any other crime whatsoever.
Facts. If you keep to the facts, then you are a pros, you're a sympathizer McCann McCann or a lover, a game player etc.

If you use freedom of speech, and you try to confronte hardliners with sometimes utterly disgusting ideas, to bring them back to the reality of the FACTS in this case, that is not possible?
They should be ban from the forum? Like the old days of 3A?

Then people who use their minds, their view may argue and argue once prevailed and these people are not flawed because dissent is not confirmed in what they see their point.

But what if their case does not correspond to the facts .....??
Should the 'facts fighters " keep their mouth shut?

That time is over ..... the facts are there and are really not so difficult to accept. If it is difficult to accept that is also the fault of the 'fact-fighters'.

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 19:51

Aristocrat wrote:Jolie,

This is a far too serious subject for game playing.

We have all seen what happened to 3A.
I'm not talking about what's happened behind the screens, which in itself is too worse for words.

I am talking about the forum and its members. Members who are or have been supporting each other congenial, reinforced each other in their arguments and the line that went right through there was: the parents have done it.
Even after July 2008 and the publication of the PJ files.
It was a hate forum. In my view this was the most despicable forum ever appeared on the Internet.
Someone with a balanced view was completed ripped of from his or hers dignity and under loud cheers from the forum they were banned. It was a brainwash forum.

Would you like to return to a forum like 3A?

After July 28 2008 and after the PJ files were known, people could, with their own eyes read what has been investigated and what came out. The fact is that there is no evidence that the parents were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine or any other crime whatsoever.
Facts. If you keep to the facts, then you are a pros, you're a sympathizer McCann McCann or a lover, a game player etc.

If you use freedom of speech, and you try to confronte hardliners with sometimes utterly disgusting ideas, to bring them back to the reality of the FACTS in this case, that is not possible?
They should be ban from the forum? Like the old days of 3A?

Then people who use their minds, their view may argue and argue once prevailed and these people are not flawed because dissent is not confirmed in what they see their point.

But what if their case does not correspond to the facts .....??
Should the 'facts fighters " keep their mouth shut?

That time is over ..... the facts are there and are really not so difficult to accept. If it is difficult to accept that is also the fault of the 'fact-fighters'.

SPOT ON!

by MaryB 27.12.09 19:53

So this is the abductor did it forum. And anything else is lies and fabrications. OK. so long as we know.

by Guest 27.12.09 20:25

I think some people just don't like being shown that others think they are spiteful to spend their days being nasty about Madeleine's parents.

That's why the child neglect supporter insults are wheeled back out.

And I would like to point out that there are no pictures of any pros I've seen where they are stood grinning outside of other people's houses they have "investigated", as in the Personal Assistant of Michael Barrymore, or any pics of pros stood at the war memorial in Rothley near their motorbikes, or any pics taken by pros of the mccann house at dusk......................... So which "side" is it involved with stalking behaviour?

If the "pros" are all "worshipping their idols (another phrase wheeled out by some when their cages are rattled) how come there aren't pictures all over the net of them with the mccanns, or at the mccanns house?

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 20:25

Were you a member of the 3as, Mary?

by Guest 27.12.09 20:27

MaryB wrote:So this is the abductor did it forum. And anything else is lies and fabrications. OK. so long as we know.

Nonsense. Praise yourself lucky there's a lot of people who want to stick to facts in stead of buying the myths, lies, fabrications and speculations.

by MaryB 27.12.09 20:32

The myths lies and fabrications according to whom? That's the real question.

by Guest 27.12.09 20:34

MaryB wrote:The myths lies and fabrications according to whom? That's the real question.

All the myths, all the lies and all the fabrications that goes against the facts.

by MaryB 27.12.09 20:35

But then we must ask the facts according to whom.

by Bea_Reasonable 27.12.09 20:39

That makes no sense, Mary, the facts are the facts they don't accord to anyone.

by Guest 27.12.09 20:41

Bea_Reasonable wrote:That makes no sense, Mary, the facts are the facts they don't accord to anyone.

True.

And the facts are that if you believe Murat has been cleared by virtue of what is in the case files, than so have the Mccanns. Some can't bend their heads around that FACT though.

by Guest 27.12.09 20:42

The official investigation, the PJ Files.

by MaryB 27.12.09 20:49

Is the lifting of the Arguido status the same as being cleared of any wrongdoing. Some say yes and some say no. Perhaps we shall have to wait till January 12th to get an answer. We might not even get one then.

by Guest 27.12.09 20:52

MaryB wrote:Is the lifting of the Arguido status the same as being cleared of any wrongdoing. Some say yes and some say no. Perhaps we shall have to wait till January 12th to get an answer. We might not even get one then.

Probably not, cos isnt Amoral on trial a few days after that for the beating of another suspect? Can't do two trials at the same time can he, now if I was cynical, I'd say the swine flu had been very advantageous to him and his entourage thinking