Everyone report abuse to remove this sick page

by ROSA 21.06.11 12:27

http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Madeleine_McCann

by Phantasia 23.06.11 2:14

ROSA wrote:http://encyclopediadramatica.ch/Madeleine_McCann

Whilst I agree that most of the content is sick, there are bits that have a woeful ring of truth about them.
Many a true word spoken in jest, as the saying goes.

[from the above link]
The whole affair was particularly nauseating to the many citizens who took issue with Kate and Gerry McCann's version of events; to wit, that they had left their four-year-old unsupervised in a ground floor bedroom with her two-year-old twin siblings.
Madeleine's parents were dining 100 yards away with other swingers at a restaurant near the Mark Warner Ocean Childlove branch. Kate and Gerry McCann reported to the police that they were taking turns checking on their children, every 3 days. At approximately lulz o'clock, Western European Summer Time, 2 days earlier, Gerry checked on the children and they were all fine.
Among the dirt to come to light was the much-vaunted "Arguido" interview in which Kate McCann's lawyer advised her not to answer 48 questions, such as "Well, where did you look for her?" and "Why did you leave the children alone while going out to get trashed in a seedy tapas bar with 7 other swingers?".

by ROSA 23.06.11 3:07

by ROSA 23.06.11 3:25

by Letterwriter 23.06.11 12:57

The whole idea of that site is to be a daft/insulting take on things - which you don't have to read. As soon as you went to that page, you must have been able to deduce from
the banner that it was in poor taste. But you read it anyway, didn't
you?

On a more serious/philosophical note - once you get into regulating things, you start to get into difficult areas. Who should police internet taste and decency? Some would say this site is in bad taste - should it be taken down? Who should be the sole arbiter of taste and decency? Or, perhaps, if a person is able to use the internet, then one supposes that they have the ability to choose which pages to read and which not to read. Or should their choice and judgement be stripped from them and the internet be some sanitised world, regulated and controlled by a couple of powerful people - just like the newspapers which this site so regularly criticises for that very reason.

So, I ask. Not where is the line, but who should be the one to draw and police it? Or maybe we should only read what we want to read. Just like we already do.

PS
Much of the article isn't even very funny, though this section had me in stitches - "Possible reward withdrawal"

by Guest 24.06.11 11:07

Good points, Letterwriter. I don't recommend accessing the site when you're in a public library as I am! I just hope that there aren't too many McCann supporters out there who think this is typical of what the sceptics believe.