Re: The McCanns Mark 1000 Days

by Autumn 18.01.10 10:41

Deanna wrote:I havent posted here before but I'm grateful for being a member.
As far as I'm concerned this party is sick.
It's made even more sick because of the day it's on. Does anyone else realise it's Holocaust Rememberence day?
As i read somewhere else, (and as Hindley and Brady have already been mentioned) I wonder if Keith Bennetts mum holds celeb parties on the 'special'anniversaries of her sons disappearance?

Hi Deanna

Totally agree, this party is one of the sickest stunts they have pulled so far and to be so insensitive as to hold the event on Holocaust Remberance day demonstrates clearly their callous disregard for others. Vaguely, I am at a loss as to how anyone can read the Gaspars' statements and not have serious concerns about Madeleine's welfare prior to her disappearance - the possiblily that she suffered neglect/abuse in her short life, sadly, cannot be ruled out.

by Pascal 18.01.10 11:18

I agree the thread has reached an abominable low. Autumn, the party as reported in the papers is atrocious, that much I agree with. Don't forget the papers are enjoying their usual embellishment of details to get a reaction from the public.

But really, comparisons to Brady and Hindley are really quite shocking and an insult to Winnie Johnson. I'm surprised this thread has run this far without some intervention.

by Autumn 18.01.10 11:25

aliberte2 wrote:The McCanns are not Serial Murderers.
There is No Comparison.

Neither were the killers of baby Peter, but I would say that they are every bit as evil as Hindley and Brady. As far as I am concerned, anyone who kills a child should be put locked away for life with no chance of release.

by vaguely1 18.01.10 11:34

But would you offer them a trial in a court of law, or just internet trial?

by vaguely1 18.01.10 11:37

Each year, the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust urges everyone in the UK to
pause and reflect on what can happen when racism, prejudice and
exclusionary behaviour are left unchecked. On HMD we take the time to
see how the lessons of the past can play a part in our communities
today.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If you haven't already done so - you can light a candle here.

by Autumn 18.01.10 11:45

Pascal, you are missing the point. Caring parents do not gallavant around arranging celeb party bashes whilst their missing child is supposedly languishing in an underground lair near PDL.
In the name of decency, this grotesque circus has to be stopped - they must be barking mad, the whole thing is beyond sick!

by vaguely1 18.01.10 11:53

Autumn wrote:Pascal, you are missing the point. Caring parents do not gallavant around arranging celeb party bashes whilst their missing child is supposedly languishing in an underground lair near PDL.
In the name of decency, this grotesque circus has to be stopped - they must be barking mad, the whole thing is beyond sick!

It's a fund raising event. to raise money.

by Autumn 18.01.10 12:03

vaguely1 wrote:
Autumn wrote:Pascal, you are missing the point. Caring parents do not gallavant around arranging celeb party bashes whilst their missing child is supposedly languishing in an underground lair near PDL.
In the name of decency, this grotesque circus has to be stopped - they must be barking mad, the whole thing is beyond sick!

It's a fund raising event. to raise money.

It is a grotesque circus.

by Cath 18.01.10 12:46

It's all in the eyes of the beholder.

Frankly, I hope it's going to be a success. The other charities could use some extra money. Recession has had it's impact on donations.

by Autumn 18.01.10 13:12

Inyx wrote:It's all in the eyes of the beholder.

Frankly, I hope it's going to be a success. The other charities could use some extra money. Recession has had it's impact on donations.

They seem to think that by rubbing shoulders with rich, famous celebs they will in some way, clear their names. Following last week's courtroom revelations, I would think charities would stand to make more money if they refused to align themselves with the McCanns - fact is, lnyx, many are now starting to view the saintly duo with increasing suspicion and would do well to distance themselves from them.

by Cath 18.01.10 13:29

Autumn wrote:
Inyx wrote:It's all in the eyes of the beholder.

Frankly, I hope it's going to be a success. The other charities could use some extra money. Recession has had it's impact on donations.

They seem to think that by rubbing shoulders with rich, famous celebs they will in some way, clear their names. Following last week's courtroom revelations, I would think charities would stand to make more money if they refused to align themselves with the McCanns - fact is, lnyx, many are now starting to view the saintly duo with increasing suspicion and would do well to distance themselves from them.

I haven't heard about that. So what charities are you talking about and how do you know? Any names?

by Pascal 18.01.10 14:26

Autumn wrote:Pascal, you are missing the point. Caring parents do not gallavant around arranging celeb party bashes whilst their missing child is supposedly languishing in an underground lair near PDL.
In the name of decency, this grotesque circus has to be stopped - they must be barking mad, the whole thing is beyond sick!

Where have I missed the point Autumn? I agree the event is in poor taste at least while there is no verdict on this libel debacle - but then the McCanns are very arrogant imo.

It's the point you are trying to make that concerns me some. You liken the McCanns to Hindley and Brady? How so? Can you explain that to me? Because I am at a total loss how anyone with half a brain cell could compare the heinous acts of the most hated woman in Britain and her sadistic lover to that of the McCanns. First of all they have not even been tried and convicted of anything. What do you think Winnie Johnson might say if she read your comments?

Your comments beggar belief Autumn and you are doing the average 'anti' of which I might be considered, a terrible disservice.
I think you should retract you comments. I really do.

by Kololi 18.01.10 16:24

Hi
Come on now - whatever happened on that day, it is not in any shape, form or fashion, even similar to Bradley and Hindley's reign of terror.

Take care

by Autumn 18.01.10 17:43

I think some of you are deliberately misunderstanding my post. The comparison to H and B is more to do with their personalities, Gerry being perceived by many as being cold, ruthless and calculating whilst Kate is often regarded as being a scheming, manipulative liar. Until this case has been solved, we simply do not know the extent of what Madeleine suffered and what has been covered up. Vaguely, still awaiting your response to my earlier post re the Gaspars' statements and other concerns.

by Autumn 18.01.10 17:54

vaguely1 wrote:Each year, the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust urges everyone in the UK to
pause and reflect on what can happen when racism, prejudice and
exclusionary behaviour are left unchecked. On HMD we take the time to
see how the lessons of the past can play a part in our communities
today.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If you haven't already done so - you can light a candle here.

Do you not think that it is rather insensitive of the McCanns to choose Holocaust Memorial Day to hold their star-studded celeb party?

by vaguely1 18.01.10 17:54

Gaspars statement, that's the one who saw david payne circling his nipple and sucking his finger, and she said she thought these were the actions of a person who would watch child pornography.

I take it for exactly what it is.

I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?

The social worker who thought she'd seen DP before - but then had full access to her files and never got back to anyone with anything.... Nothing to make of that.

I'm still a little bit shaken with this thread - apologies for not answering before, I thought it was a rhetorical question.

by vaguely1 18.01.10 17:56

Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:Each year, the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust urges everyone in the UK to
pause and reflect on what can happen when racism, prejudice and
exclusionary behaviour are left unchecked. On HMD we take the time to
see how the lessons of the past can play a part in our communities
today.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If you haven't already done so - you can light a candle here.

Do you not think that it is rather insensitive of the McCanns to choose Holocaust Memorial Day to hold their star-studded celeb party?

Not unless they're planning on dressing up as Nazis.

Did you know it was HMD when you first complained about this fund raising event? Only it was mentioned by another poster ....

There are thousands of events happening on that day around the world - literally thousands.

What are you doing for HMD?

Apple are holding a huge event 27th Jan. There are theatre shows all
over the world, there will be other fund raising events for other
charities, people will be born, people will die, people will go to work and carry on as normal.

Why should one small charity raising event in London be singled out as insensitive, or are all these other things insensitive as well? I'm not seeing how the McCanns are linked to the Holocaust now [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Ruby 18.01.10 18:05

vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

by Autumn 18.01.10 18:12

vaguely1 wrote:Gaspars statement, that's the one who saw david payne circling his nipple and sucking his finger, and she said she thought these were the actions of a person who would watch child pornography.

I take it for exactly what it is.

I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?

The social worker who thought she'd seen DP before - but then had full access to her files and never got back to anyone with anything.... Nothing to make of that.

I'm still a little bit shaken with this thread - apologies for not answering before, I thought it was a rhetorical question.

Well I am more than a little shaken that you have been so dismissive of the serious concerns raised in the Gaspars' statements and am shocked at your David Walliams comparison.

by vaguely1 18.01.10 18:13

Ruby wrote:vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

Maybe they were shocked you were wondering around with a copy of a police statement in your hand Ruby. (Edited to add:) There are a lot of people, members of the public, who are not used to police statements, and have no idea of the sheer number, or content of statements that the police will have in relation to serious crimes. Most members of the public are lucky to be shielded from the reality of these situations.

So when one person does it it's meant to shock, not represent real life, yet when another does it it's accepted as the opposite.

If you can tell me how rubbing your nipple is linked to child pornography I'll be happy to take on board what you say.

by vaguely1 18.01.10 18:14

Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:Gaspars statement, that's the one who saw david payne circling his nipple and sucking his finger, and she said she thought these were the actions of a person who would watch child pornography.

I take it for exactly what it is.

I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?

The social worker who thought she'd seen DP before - but then had full access to her files and never got back to anyone with anything.... Nothing to make of that.

I'm still a little bit shaken with this thread - apologies for not answering before, I thought it was a rhetorical question.

Well I am more than a little shaken that you have been so dismissive of the serious concerns raised in the Gaspars' statements and am shocked at your David Walliams comparison.

Okay.

by Pascal 18.01.10 18:42

Autumn. I'm not letting this go. You have made a huge balls up with your ridiculous comparisons. For goodness sake stop backpedaling and please have some respect and retract your comments.

Ian Brady and Myra Hindley were cold blooded, child torturing murderers. They even recorded the acts for posterity. The mother of one of the victims had to endure it all in court. She never recovered. What an insult to her memory. I was in my pram at the time they committed those heinous acts. The second wave of the publicity in the eighties, when I was in my twenties was enough. It re-ignited the publicity around the case which along with the Bulger and West cases must be considered as the worst this country has seen.

I'm actually stunned. Is this what the MF is all about then? Or is it just your twisted notions. Because it is twisted Autumn. Do you think rants like those will help Mr Amaral?

I'm anti abduction theory but would rather eat my own hair than be associated with such grotesque ideas of what the McCanns represent to you.

I dislike them intently, but thank Christ some of us know where to draw a line.

by Autumn 18.01.10 18:47

Pascal, I refer you to my earlier post. As for those who kill children, they should all rot in hell for the rest of their miserable worthless lives. For the record, I am not a member of the MF.

As for what the McCanns represent to me, don't even go there.

by Autumn 18.01.10 18:47

Double post, sorry.

by Cath 18.01.10 18:52

deleted. don't want to interrupt your fight.

Autumn admit you're wrong and drop it.

by Pascal 18.01.10 18:55

I think we have well and truly got the gist of your feelings Autumn. A pity then that you have little consideration for the feelings of others here.

by Autumn 18.01.10 18:59

Inyx wrote:deleted. don't want to interrupt your fight.

Autumn admit you're wrong and drop it.

There is no fight and, as far as I am concerned, the matter is closed.

by Pascal 18.01.10 19:01

no retraction then?

by Ruby 18.01.10 19:24

vaguely1 wrote:
Ruby wrote:vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

Maybe they were shocked you were wondering around with a copy of a police statement in your hand Ruby. (Edited to add:) There are a lot of people, members of the public, who are not used to police statements, and have no idea of the sheer number, or content of statements that the police will have in relation to serious crimes. Most members of the public are lucky to be shielded from the reality of these situations.

So when one person does it it's meant to shock, not represent real life, yet when another does it it's accepted as the opposite.

If you can tell me how rubbing your nipple is linked to child pornography I'll be happy to take on board what you say.

I think when accompanied by his other action and while talking about whether his friend's preschool daughter 'would do this' it's pretty dodgy, but that's just me then, as you were

by vaguely1 18.01.10 19:40

to be pedantic "Saying something like".

It's the wording that makes all the difference. Had Mrs Gaspar have stated for a fact this was what was said then it would have a different impact on my thoughts than it does.

I would like to think that if she was certain of what was said she would have contacted the authorities at the time. I don't know her reasons for not having done so.

I hope that makes sense?

ETA: I think what I'm trying to say is why would you have any contact with a person who you thought was a paedophile. It's madness.

Latest topics