The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Incitement - Page 2 Mm11

Incitement - Page 2 Regist10

Incitement

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by jmac on 19.02.12 16:47

There was nothing to investigate and no evidence to gather until Gunnill got involved. His involvement helped to create a situation.

I`m referring to NUJ code of conduct which seems to have disappeared...
avatar
jmac

Posts : 121
Join date : 2011-09-29

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 19.02.12 17:26

@wgbrother wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Kololi wrote:I wouldn't be as bold as to say Mr Gunnill acted out of spite

Spite is a strong word, I probably overstepped there, but what I am getting at is he and the Express were trying to create a story about TB and his undertaking, deceiving TB into selling a booklet so they could write a story about it. It would perhaps be different if this deception was undertaken if they had reports from people that TB was selling booklets foe example, and they just wanted to be sure the story was true. Not creating a story by entrapment for grubby tenners.

or that the McCanns are doing this to Mr Bennett for revenge.

I actually stand by this. TB wanted to instigate an action against the Mc's, appeared on the radio about it and James Whale was very rude to him. If they were not after TB specifically or with revenge, why not sue any number of other people like Joana Morais, SteelMagnolia, HiDeHo and so on who have published a great deal of material which does not show the Mc's in a positive way. Amaral and TB seem to have been singled out, perhaps because they are more "credible" for want of a better expression, and potentially have greater sway over people views.

He is however, the key figure of the foundation and I suppose they feel that if they cut off the head of the snake then it may wither and die.

SInce the Mc's have had far more than their fair share of public and private money thrown at their "agonising plight" and been given payouts galore and pride of place at the LI, i rather think that even a supposedly impartial judge is likely to feel that they are pushing their luck or could simply be irritated by them. No amount of money or attention will ever be enough it seems. And judging by the comments on newspaper websites about them, it seems a great many people now wish they'd just sod off.

I think you will find that a large number of the public including Judges are not inclined as you seem to be to tell the parents of a missing toddler to "sod off". I think you are deluding yourself if you think that a couple of hundred vociferous comments on newspaper articles reflect the public mood. In my experience many people still feel a great deal of sympathy to the parents of a missing toddler. I am not saying that is wise or not but it is a fact.

I am sure a judge will weigh up the legal position and will not be swayed by anything else. If TB committed an offence then he will be dealt with at the forthcoming hearing. If Gunnill committed an offence then the CPS may wish to take action. But the judge won't be relying on comments in the Express to help him decide.

Not my feeling but a reflection of the comments. The comments are very much in the vein of wishing they'd stop popping up in the news. This is just a fact. A few hundred vociferous commentators far outweigh the one or two who make sympathetic comments. Every one here and elsewhere feels the most enormous compassion for Madeleine herself. This does not necessarily extend to those who should have stayed in with their tiny infants rather than go off for dinner, checks or no checks. I think you'll find that the sympathy lies with the child herself who is the victim here. Not with those who put her in the vulnerable position which resulted in us being here discussing it 5 yrs on. Perhaps its time for certain peeps to stop wasting search funds on suing and get out there and do some proper searching without a public fanfare.

____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors
Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2427
Join date : 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Kololi on 19.02.12 17:54

"the child herself who is the victim here."

Eight important words. Thank you.

:flower:

Kololi
Kololi

Posts : 677
Join date : 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by wgbrother on 19.02.12 17:56

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@wgbrother wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Kololi wrote:I wouldn't be as bold as to say Mr Gunnill acted out of spite

Spite is a strong word, I probably overstepped there, but what I am getting at is he and the Express were trying to create a story about TB and his undertaking, deceiving TB into selling a booklet so they could write a story about it. It would perhaps be different if this deception was undertaken if they had reports from people that TB was selling booklets foe example, and they just wanted to be sure the story was true. Not creating a story by entrapment for grubby tenners.

or that the McCanns are doing this to Mr Bennett for revenge.

I actually stand by this. TB wanted to instigate an action against the Mc's, appeared on the radio about it and James Whale was very rude to him. If they were not after TB specifically or with revenge, why not sue any number of other people like Joana Morais, SteelMagnolia, HiDeHo and so on who have published a great deal of material which does not show the Mc's in a positive way. Amaral and TB seem to have been singled out, perhaps because they are more "credible" for want of a better expression, and potentially have greater sway over people views.

He is however, the key figure of the foundation and I suppose they feel that if they cut off the head of the snake then it may wither and die.

SInce the Mc's have had far more than their fair share of public and private money thrown at their "agonising plight" and been given payouts galore and pride of place at the LI, i rather think that even a supposedly impartial judge is likely to feel that they are pushing their luck or could simply be irritated by them. No amount of money or attention will ever be enough it seems. And judging by the comments on newspaper websites about them, it seems a great many people now wish they'd just sod off.

I think you will find that a large number of the public including Judges are not inclined as you seem to be to tell the parents of a missing toddler to "sod off". I think you are deluding yourself if you think that a couple of hundred vociferous comments on newspaper articles reflect the public mood. In my experience many people still feel a great deal of sympathy to the parents of a missing toddler. I am not saying that is wise or not but it is a fact.

I am sure a judge will weigh up the legal position and will not be swayed by anything else. If TB committed an offence then he will be dealt with at the forthcoming hearing. If Gunnill committed an offence then the CPS may wish to take action. But the judge won't be relying on comments in the Express to help him decide.

Not my feeling but a reflection of the comments. The comments are very much in the vein of wishing they'd stop popping up in the news. This is just a fact. A few hundred vociferous commentators far outweigh the one or two who make sympathetic comments. Every one here and elsewhere feels the most enormous compassion for Madeleine herself. This does not necessarily extend to those who should have stayed in with their tiny infants rather than go off for dinner, checks or no checks. I think you'll find that the sympathy lies with the child herself who is the victim here. Not with those who put her in the vulnerable position which resulted in us being here discussing it 5 yrs on. Perhaps its time for certain peeps to stop wasting search funds on suing and get out there and do some proper searching without a public fanfare.
The comments decrying the McCanns are never in excess of a couple of hundred and again I think you are deluding yourself by exaggerating the low numbers of those with other views. Also it is silly to forget as we all know the comments are deliberately encouraged on this and other forums and the majority are from the same people over and over again.

I disagree with your claims too. It may be true that people here are compassionate towards Madeleine herself but I have seen in the media and among my own contacts large numbers of people who are genuinely compassionate to her parents who they think are suffering both from the loss of their child and the abuse they have received from media and others over the years. Both sides are equally represented in my opinion. Just where the comments are concerned in certain papers the orchestration of commenting seems to change the balance.

Your opinions are perfectly valid but you need to remain aware that not everyone believes the same as you.

____________________

avatar
wgbrother

Posts : 76
Join date : 2012-02-18

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by wgbrother on 19.02.12 18:00

@jmac wrote:There was nothing to investigate and no evidence to gather until Gunnill got involved. His involvement helped to create a situation.

I`m referring to NUJ code of conduct which seems to have disappeared...

Disappeared?
Google is your friend.
Google the words NUJ code of conduct and it is the number one result.
avatar
wgbrother

Posts : 76
Join date : 2012-02-18

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by wgbrother on 19.02.12 18:06

@jmac wrote:There was nothing to investigate and no evidence to gather until Gunnill got involved. His involvement helped to create a situation.

I`m referring to NUJ code of conduct which seems to have disappeared...

Gunnill's involvement was initially simply professional. He was then targetted by people trying to deprive him of his livelihood. The full story of all that will no doubt be of great interest to the judge when/if TB questions Gunnill at the hearing. I wonder whether the judge will be looking as kindly on TB after the full details of that campaign are revealed?

____________________

avatar
wgbrother

Posts : 76
Join date : 2012-02-18

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Guest on 19.02.12 18:06

Posts off topic have been deleted.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Guest on 19.02.12 18:14

@wgbrother wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Posts off topic have been deleted.

Oh dear you posted the off topic comment in the first place but because you cannot answer my perfectly reasonable points about Pat Brown you have now deleted them both. How cynical.

No, you did, in answer to Kolioli. , bringing the abduction and Pat into this thread. I said it was off topic, yet you decided to post again, so comments deleted.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 19.02.12 18:17

People will always have different opinions it is true, and more people would not have such a dim view of the parents had they chosen a different path over the last few years. The fact is we have seen some pretty weird behaviour, there was even a letter ( I could probably locate and share) from one of the PJ investigating officers regarding the arrogance of the Tapas gang. When the PJ were trying to negotiate a reconstruction (the correspondence both ways is available for viewing) the Tapas were questioning the value of a reconstruction and as we all know refused to do it when they realised it was for the police to consolidate their statement rather than as a televised crime watch style feature. This demonstrated that far from being co-operative they wanted to dictate terms. The Investigating officer commented in a letter to the guy from Leicester Police how irregular it ws for witnesses to dictate the course of an investigation.

And it has been so all along. When the portugese police recommended that the McCanns could be endangering their daughters life by revealing the mark in her eye, Gerry remarked that it was too good a marketing ploy. Marketing then, rated higher on his "wider agenda" and he was willing to put his daughters life at great danger, effectively for a marketing ploy. Of course they denied making anything much of her eye on the Piers Morgan interview, despite posters, t-shirts etc and using it as a campaign logo for 2 yrs!

There are two among many, very valid reasons why many people don't think much of K and G. By their own words and actions, they have conducted a campaign which to many is hugely insulting both to their intelligence and for it's long list of hypocrisies.

Remember, Gerry said himself at the Leveson inquiry that he believed in freedom of speech and had no problem with people purporting theories, but has attempted to sue the arse of those who have done so backed up with evidence from the police files.

Anyway wgbrother/xavier/sans souci or whoever you are, thousands and thousands of members of the public have very valid reasons for feel in the way they do, most of which has come directly from the mouths of the Mc's themselves. The rest from the total and utter lack of any evidence within any published official documents to support the theory which they are purporting.

____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors
Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2427
Join date : 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by wgbrother on 19.02.12 18:31

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:People will always have different opinions it is true, and more people would not have such a dim view of the parents had they chosen a different path over the last few years. The fact is we have seen some pretty weird behaviour, there was even a letter ( I could probably locate and share) from one of the PJ investigating officers regarding the arrogance of the Tapas gang. When the PJ were trying to negotiate a reconstruction (the correspondence both ways is available for viewing) the Tapas were questioning the value of a reconstruction and as we all know refused to do it when they realised it was for the police to consolidate their statement rather than as a televised crime watch style feature. This demonstrated that far from being co-operative they wanted to dictate terms. The Investigating officer commented in a letter to the guy from Leicester Police how irregular it ws for witnesses to dictate the course of an investigation.

And it has been so all along. When the portugese police recommended that the McCanns could be endangering their daughters life by revealing the mark in her eye, Gerry remarked that it was too good a marketing ploy. Marketing then, rated higher on his "wider agenda" and he was willing to put his daughters life at great danger, effectively for a marketing ploy. Of course they denied making anything much of her eye on the Piers Morgan interview, despite posters, t-shirts etc and using it as a campaign logo for 2 yrs!

There are two among many, very valid reasons why many people don't think much of K and G. By their own words and actions, they have conducted a campaign which to many is hugely insulting both to their intelligence and for it's long list of hypocrisies.

Remember, Gerry said himself at the Leveson inquiry that he believed in freedom of speech and had no problem with people purporting theories, but has attempted to sue the arse of those who have done so backed up with evidence from the police files.

Anyway wgbrother/xavier/sans souci or whoever you are, thousands and thousands of members of the public have very valid reasons for feel in the way they do, most of which has come directly from the mouths of the Mc's themselves. The rest from the total and utter lack of any evidence within any published official documents to support the theory which they are purporting.

I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
avatar
wgbrother

Posts : 76
Join date : 2012-02-18

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Kololi on 19.02.12 19:01

I didn't mean to take the post off topic Candyfloss.

It could have been a thread about the King of Siam and if those few words had been there I would not have been able to stop my fingers doing the typing because I think sometimes we all forget who all this debate and discussion should be about, myself included.

Apologies to all.

flag

Back on topic.

I do remember the photo of Debbie and if I recall rightly I don't think she was happy about it but I think it was Mr Bennett who wrote to the paper on her behalf. Mind she wasn't happy with Mr Bennett after a while!

Best to remember I suppose that we can all summise what we think might happen but the Judge will make his decision at the end of the day whether Mr Gunnill was a tadge mischevious or not in the way he obtained the booklet and whether Mr Bennett should have used his loaf a little more than he semms to have at the time.

Kololi
Kololi

Posts : 677
Join date : 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by wgbrother on 19.02.12 19:05

@Kololi wrote:I didn't mean to take the post off topic Candyfloss.

It could have been a thread about the King of Siam and if those few words had been there I would not have been able to stop my fingers doing the typing because I think sometimes we all forget who all this debate and discussion should be about, myself included.

Apologies to all.

Incitement - Page 2 444319

Back on topic.

I do remember the photo of Debbie and if I recall rightly I don't think she was happy about it but I think it was Mr Bennett who wrote to the paper on her behalf. Mind she wasn't happy with Mr Bennett after a while!

Best to remember I suppose that we can all summise what we think might happen but the Judge will make his decision at the end of the day whether Mr Gunnill was a tadge mischevious or not in the way he obtained the booklet and whether Mr Bennett should have used his loaf a little more than he semms to have at the time.


At the back of the judge's mind of course will be the simple fact that TB promised in his undertaking that he wouldn't sell any more books. The fact that he did sell a book is not disputed. I think the judge will spot that quite quickly. The Gunnill duplicity may be taken into account as some kind of mitigation but it cannot take away the fact that TB sold the book when he shouldn't have done.
avatar
wgbrother

Posts : 76
Join date : 2012-02-18

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Ribisl on 20.02.12 22:32

@wgbrother wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:People will always have different opinions it is true, and more people would not have such a dim view of the parents had they chosen a different path over the last few years. The fact is we have seen some pretty weird behaviour, there was even a letter ( I could probably locate and share) from one of the PJ investigating officers regarding the arrogance of the Tapas gang. When the PJ were trying to negotiate a reconstruction (the correspondence both ways is available for viewing) the Tapas were questioning the value of a reconstruction and as we all know refused to do it when they realised it was for the police to consolidate their statement rather than as a televised crime watch style feature. This demonstrated that far from being co-operative they wanted to dictate terms. The Investigating officer commented in a letter to the guy from Leicester Police how irregular it ws for witnesses to dictate the course of an investigation.

And it has been so all along. When the portugese police recommended that the McCanns could be endangering their daughters life by revealing the mark in her eye, Gerry remarked that it was too good a marketing ploy. Marketing then, rated higher on his "wider agenda" and he was willing to put his daughters life at great danger, effectively for a marketing ploy. Of course they denied making anything much of her eye on the Piers Morgan interview, despite posters, t-shirts etc and using it as a campaign logo for 2 yrs!

There are two among many, very valid reasons why many people don't think much of K and G. By their own words and actions, they have conducted a campaign which to many is hugely insulting both to their intelligence and for it's long list of hypocrisies.

Remember, Gerry said himself at the Leveson inquiry that he believed in freedom of speech and had no problem with people purporting theories, but has attempted to sue the arse of those who have done so backed up with evidence from the police files.

Anyway wgbrother/xavier/sans souci or whoever you are, thousands and thousands of members of the public have very valid reasons for feel in the way they do, most of which has come directly from the mouths of the Mc's themselves. The rest from the total and utter lack of any evidence within any published official documents to support the theory which they are purporting.

I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.

A flow of words is a sure sign of duplicity. (Honore De Balzac) comes to my mind coffee


____________________
There is a taint of death, a flavour of mortality in lies... Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
avatar
Ribisl

Posts : 807
Join date : 2012-02-04

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by tigger on 21.02.12 8:36

kololi wrote:


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
unquote

Just to break down this grammatically offensive statement:
I strongly believe in freedom of speech.
But there are people who are carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so.
(This seems to have lost something in translation - one cannot 'carry out an inaccuracy' one can be inaccurate in statements or writing).
These people have been shown to carry out inaccuracies and they must be accountable.
This phrase is meaningless - see above.
He doesn't mind 'purporting' theories, writing fiction or suggestions.
I take this to mean we may theorise.
We may write fiction (disclaimers in most fiction books based on known events already take care of that, we don't need Gerry's permission for that).
We may make suggestions.

But clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrenceThis last sentence I take to refer to the press, rather than any forum, this forum in particular is very keen on references and sources on which our theories or suggestions are based.



____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
tigger
tigger

Posts : 8114
Join date : 2011-07-20

http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by worriedmum on 21.02.12 8:55

''I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have
people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown
to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I
don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction,
suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard
reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily
occurrence.''

I'm so confused!!! Is there some material , objected to by the Mccanns, which is simply reproduced by Tony Bennett from the police files? If so , wouldn't they be put out to have their material described like that?
worriedmum
worriedmum

Posts : 2015
Join date : 2012-01-17

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Kololi on 21.02.12 9:05

@tigger wrote:kololi wrote:


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
unquote

Just to break down this grammatically offensive statement:
I strongly believe in freedom of speech.
But there are people who are carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so.
(This seems to have lost something in translation - one cannot 'carry out an inaccuracy' one can be inaccurate in statements or writing).
These people have been shown to carry out inaccuracies and they must be accountable.
This phrase is meaningless - see above.
He doesn't mind 'purporting' theories, writing fiction or suggestions.
I take this to mean we may theorise.
We may write fiction (disclaimers in most fiction books based on known events already take care of that, we don't need Gerry's permission for that).
We may make suggestions.

But clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrenceThis last sentence I take to refer to the press, rather than any forum, this forum in particular is very keen on references and sources on which our theories or suggestions are based.






Actually Tigger, Kololi did not write this.
Kololi
Kololi

Posts : 677
Join date : 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by rainbow-fairy on 21.02.12 10:00

Basically, Gerry is saying he is perfectly happy for us to have theories as long as they agree with his. Hypocritical little worm.

____________________
"Ask the dogs, Sandra" - Gerry McCann to Sandra FelgueirasIncitement - Page 2 670379



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
rainbow-fairy

Posts : 1971
Join date : 2011-05-26
Age : 45
Location : going round in circles

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by tigger on 21.02.12 13:52

@Kololi wrote:
@tigger wrote:kololi wrote:


I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence.

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up? If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now.

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always.
unquote

tigger wrote:
Just to break down this grammatically offensive statement:
I strongly believe in freedom of speech.
But there are people who are carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so.
(This seems to have lost something in translation - one cannot 'carry out an inaccuracy' one can be inaccurate in statements or writing).
These people have been shown to carry out inaccuracies and they must be accountable.
This phrase is meaningless - see above.
He doesn't mind 'purporting' theories, writing fiction or suggestions.
I take this to mean we may theorise.
We may write fiction (disclaimers in most fiction books based on known events already take care of that, we don't need Gerry's permission for that).
We may make suggestions.

But clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrenceThis last sentence I take to refer to the press, rather than any forum, this forum in particular is very keen on references and sources on which our theories or suggestions are based.






Actually Tigger, Kololi did not write this.

I apologise Kololi, GWbrother is the one I should have quoted. My apologies.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
tigger
tigger

Posts : 8114
Join date : 2011-07-20

http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Kololi on 22.02.12 10:59

NP - easily done.
Kololi
Kololi

Posts : 677
Join date : 2010-01-10

Back to top Go down

Incitement - Page 2 Empty Re: Incitement

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 22.02.12 16:50

@wgbrother wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:People will always have different opinions it is true, and more people would not have such a dim view of the parents had they chosen a different path over the last few years. The fact is we have seen some pretty weird behaviour, there was even a letter ( I could probably locate and share) from one of the PJ investigating officers regarding the arrogance of the Tapas gang. When the PJ were trying to negotiate a reconstruction (the correspondence both ways is available for viewing) the Tapas were questioning the value of a reconstruction and as we all know refused to do it when they realised it was for the police to consolidate their statement rather than as a televised crime watch style feature. This demonstrated that far from being co-operative they wanted to dictate terms. The Investigating officer commented in a letter to the guy from Leicester Police how irregular it ws for witnesses to dictate the course of an investigation.

And it has been so all along. When the portugese police recommended that the McCanns could be endangering their daughters life by revealing the mark in her eye, Gerry remarked that it was too good a marketing ploy. Marketing then, rated higher on his "wider agenda" and he was willing to put his daughters life at great danger, effectively for a marketing ploy. Of course they denied making anything much of her eye on the Piers Morgan interview, despite posters, t-shirts etc and using it as a campaign logo for 2 yrs!

There are two among many, very valid reasons why many people don't think much of K and G. By their own words and actions, they have conducted a campaign which to many is hugely insulting both to their intelligence and for it's long list of hypocrisies.

Remember, Gerry said himself at the Leveson inquiry that he believed in freedom of speech and had no problem with people purporting theories, but has attempted to sue the arse of those who have done so backed up with evidence from the police files.

Anyway wgbrother/xavier/sans souci or whoever you are, thousands and thousands of members of the public have very valid reasons for feel in the way they do, most of which has come directly from the mouths of the Mc's themselves. The rest from the total and utter lack of any evidence within any published official documents to support the theory which they are purporting.

I recall very clearly what Gerry McCann said at Leveson about freedom of speech.
It is a shame that you have fallen into that trap of partially recalling what he said.
not a partial recollection, but emphasising the most hypocritical part

Better to have the full statement than your partial recollection I think.

I strongly believe in freedom of speech, but where you have people who are repeatedly carrying out inaccuracies and have been shown to do so, then they should be held to account. That is the issue. Here's where I agree with Gerry, so why hasn't the Tapas gang been held to account for repeatedly producing conflicting information? Can't have your cake and eat it.I don't have a problem with somebody purporting a theory, writing fiction, suggestions, but clearly we've got to a stage where substandard reporting and sources, unnamed, made-up, non-verifiable, are a daily occurrence. So don't keep drawing attention to it by being litigious. Just ignore it

You may claim that thousands and thousands believe what you believe but do you actually have anything to back that up?Yes actually. I'm only a member of this forum, and this is one of many with large memberships. Plenty of people just in my acquaintance don't believe the Mc version, in fact I don't actually know anyone who does. If I recall the Alan Marc Lagoa petition didn't even raise 1000 signatures and has been going for a very long time now. And? Not everyone who doesn't believe the story is actively engaged or sufficiently interested to sign petitions etc

ps I am not Xavier or Sans Souci. It is always interesting when people try to imagine that only one other person exists who disagrees with them. Always. No you are wrong. I only assumed you were because your style of trolling is so similar. I really don't give a hoot who disagrees with me, we are entitled to hold any view we choose.

I normally wouldn't even feed a troll but when a troll is so blatantly wrong on so many counts it leads to a strong case of lastworditis!

____________________
The truth will out.
Smokeandmirrors
Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2427
Join date : 2011-07-31

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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