Re: Kate McCann 'Mothers Day Interview' - BBC Radio 2

by aiyoyo 25.10.11 16:44

rainbow-fairy wrote:Kate McCann says in her Aled Jones interview that

"Kate McCann says her faith has given her 'inner strength'

She also says her belief in God gave her an "inner strength" on the day Portuguese police made her a suspect or "arguido" in the little girl's disappearance."

Really really? 'Coz I could've sworn (no pun intended) that it was that delightful mantra silently directed at Ricardo that gave her strength - 'f**king t***er' wasn't it?
"'F***ing t***er, f***ing t***er, f***ing t***er'. This quiet chant kept me calm, kept me under control. This man did not deserve my respect. 'F***ing t***er..."
Er, fair enough, Kate. But which was it really? God, or gutter language?

Kate uses God's name to suit her convenience. When it suited her she wasn't religious like her mum said, yet post Maddie's disappearance she used GOD as an excuse to garner sympathy vote and to evoke emotions with the pious believers.

She is shameless with her incessant lies and sinful using religion to help her lies. Karma will get her.

by rainbow-fairy 25.10.11 18:05

aiyoyo wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:Kate McCann says in her Aled Jones interview that

"Kate McCann says her faith has given her 'inner strength'

She also says her belief in God gave her an "inner strength" on the day Portuguese police made her a suspect or "arguido" in the little girl's disappearance."

Really really? 'Coz I could've sworn (no pun intended) that it was that delightful mantra silently directed at Ricardo that gave her strength - 'f**king t***er' wasn't it?
"'F***ing t***er, f***ing t***er, f***ing t***er'. This quiet chant kept me calm, kept me under control. This man did not deserve my respect. 'F***ing t***er..."
Er, fair enough, Kate. But which was it really? God, or gutter language?

Kate uses God's name to suit her convenience. When it suited her she wasn't religious like her mum said, yet post Maddie's disappearance she used GOD as an excuse to garner sympathy vote and to evoke emotions with the pious believers.

She is shameless with her incessant lies and sinful using religion to help her lies. Karma will get her.

Aiyoyo, agree 100% :)

by anil39200 25.10.11 18:25

Hi,
I dont post very often at the moment as I am still trying to work my way through a lot of the reading on this case without having to resort to too much Calpo l(sorry aspirin), so please bear with me.

Re:the two pictures, the one in the pool seems to have a strange patch of light on top of the head which to me shouldnt be there, so I suspect, though with limited knowledge that it may be a "doctored" photo (ooops sorry for that poor pun-couldnt resist.)

Re the Harry Potter thing....that is hard to believe, I was an early reader and read quite long books as early as four, but that was years ago, when my daughters both read Harry Potter they were in their teens, But, to read Harry Potter is one thing, to have Harry Potter toys and play with them may be another, so I cannot agree with the idea of a child of 3 reading anything of such complexity,watchiing the dvd maybe, and becoming a "fan" through that, but not reading the books.

Mothers Day -----should it be renamed neglectors day then?

There are many hard working mothers out there who have had the adversity of losing a child be it a young child or a child lost as an adult in accidents , war etc, but very few of them receive as much favourable attention, protection and publicity as these two. Personally, they disgust me, but that doesnt really add to the discussion. I can only assume that the changing of pictures is part of the disinformation which has persisted through the last four years as the TM machine rolls on trying to steamroll the public into believing their story. Whilst the coffers continue to be filled. It is to be hoped that February will bring some of the real truth.

Money, money, money as the wise old swedish sages used to sing.

by jd 25.10.11 18:33

Welcome to the forum anil39200. Yes you are right the changing of the pictures is part of the confusion and disinformation from the mccann team. That light on Maddies head I saw too, I think this was meant to sell the story that it was sunny!!!!

by anil39200 25.10.11 18:52

thanks jd, I need two aspirin now

by rainbow-fairy 25.10.11 21:19

aiyoyo wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:Kate McCann says in her Aled Jones interview that

"Kate McCann says her faith has given her 'inner strength'

She also says her belief in God gave her an "inner strength" on the day Portuguese police made her a suspect or "arguido" in the little girl's disappearance."

Really really? 'Coz I could've sworn (no pun intended) that it was that delightful mantra silently directed at Ricardo that gave her strength - 'f**king t***er' wasn't it?
"'F***ing t***er, f***ing t***er, f***ing t***er'. This quiet chant kept me calm, kept me under control. This man did not deserve my respect. 'F***ing t***er..."
Er, fair enough, Kate. But which was it really? God, or gutter language?

Kate uses God's name to suit her convenience. When it suited her she wasn't religious like her mum said, yet post Maddie's disappearance she used GOD as an excuse to garner sympathy vote and to evoke emotions with the pious believers.

She is shameless with her incessant lies and sinful using religion to help her lies. Karma will get her.

You are right. I am 100% certain that in no way, shape or form are Kate and Gerry devout Catholics. I have posted my opinion on this before but I wanted something to post from an outside source:

What is the Catholic position on In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF)?
By Insight Staff
Issue: October 2002

VATICAN DOCUMENTS: In-Vitro Fertilization

Answer: In IVF, a fertilizable ovum is removed from a woman's ovary and put in a petri dish (the Latin for dish is vitrum) to which a few concentrated drops of sperm are added. On the third or fourth day the fertilized ovum is put in the woman's womb. Only a small percentage of fertilized ova result in a child being born. The other children are lost or killed.

The instances of infertility can be increased by previous venereal disease, late childbearing, the previous use of intra-uterine devices, irreversible tubal ligation, and previous abortion, for all of which a woman might be responsible. IVF also is expensive.

No person and no couple has a right to a child. A child is a person with rights; it is not merely an object, a possession. A doctor treats disease; he should not do what is over and above the goal of health. He is allowed to treat a woman for a condition causing infertility, but not to "manufacture" her child. And medical treatment of the woman is often more successful than IVF in overcoming infertility.

Other considerations are that (1) in IVF, imperfect sperm are not screened out as they are in natural conception, (2) imperfect or supernumerary foetuses are often killed, (3) more children are born prematurely, with problems resulting from this; (4) medical problems for a woman can occur in IVF more than in natural pregnancy; and (5) the whole process is a degradation of parenthood, which should begin with an intimate and profoundly personal expression of love.

Sometimes the ova that are put in the petri dish come not from a man's wife but from another woman, or the sperm fertilizing his wife's ova come from another man. This can easily result in psychological and legal problems, and certainly results in a moral one.

Questons: What is the status of this teaching?

Answer: . For the reasons given, the Church considers IVF to be mortally sinful. Indeed, one of these reasons is sufficient of itself to outlaw the practice: the degrading of the two-in-one-flesh unity of parents by deflating the importance of the flesh as a vehicle of love in the formation of new life.

This is true even if the ovum and sperm come a husband and wife. How much more so, then, if this is not the case?

Questons: What is the basic text?

Answer: Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation, by the Congregation of the Faith, Feb. 22, 1987.
There are reservations amongst Catholics that the artificial creation of children outside of the 'sacred act' reduces them to mere 'objects' to be treated as the parents wish, rather than little people in their own right. It has often been mentioned how detatched towards Maddie the McCann's seem, how she wasn't treated well. TBH, 'devoted, devout pious Catholics' would accept that childlessness is in God's plan for them, their 'cross to bear'. They take the view that children are a gift from God, a privilege NOT a right. It is deeply narcissistic to insist on bearing your own children against your faith. Adoption however would fit perfectly. So, not religious or they would not have committed such a sin in the first place.

by Guest 25.10.11 21:53

aiyoyo wrote: Kate uses God's name to suit her convenience. When it suited her she wasn't religious like her mum said, yet post Maddie's disappearance she used GOD as an excuse to garner sympathy vote and to evoke emotions with the pious believers.

She is shameless with her incessant lies and sinful using religion to help her lies. Karma will get her.

Well said, Aiyoyo, and here is hoping, that Karma can't come soon enough.