The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Page 2 of 2 Previous  1, 2

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Cristobell on 19.07.12 13:36

@russiandoll wrote: "My views pretty much depend on how much I have had to drink. "

You say the above and want a topic with the title" rational discourse"? Are you having a laugh?
I would have enjoyed a vigorous debate with you over issues where members in many instances have entrenched views, the same way that I wish some hardened pro abduction- ers would come and debate sensibly.
However, because of the above quote, I will not be engaging in any further discussion. To say your alcohol levels dictate your opinions about such a serious matter is extremely offensive imo, why don't you limit your time on here to when you are not partially inebriated, then you might find your opinions don't sway in the wind.




I had hoped a touch of humour might take the heat out of the debate. However, I well get a breathalyser to keep next to my keyboard.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by russiandoll on 19.07.12 13:44

no heat in the debate as far as I can see....I for one saw someone looking for a balanced view no more no less.
Apologies for not appreciating your sense of humour, it did appear a bizarre comment to make, even if meant tongue in cheek.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by tigger on 19.07.12 13:49

@Cristobell wrote:
@tigger wrote:Christobel wrote:
[...] Whilst I can appreciate your fear of advertising (I presume), I am an active member of this forum,! and my book is about child abuse, a subject that is also of interest to many members. That it is of benefit to me personally,! is a bonus, I have to make a living like anyone else. That I have chosen to blog on a topic I know quite a bit a about,! is my choice,! and I am merely letting readers here,! know I have done a blog that is relevant to this forum.
unquote

It is difficult to have a discussion with anyone who changes their stance as often as you do. It is clear from earlier posts that you seem to have moved much closer to the official story as given by the McCanns.

Re the bolded sentence: it seems to be a contradiction in terms, if it is a surprise that it is of personal benefit - then 'having to make a living' doesn't follow. Only as a reason for posting your advertisements is that a valid argument imo.


I don't think I did express surprise, though do please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, the book is something that happened along the way, that I have an interest in the mccann case is incidental. I am not advertising plumbing or electricals tigger, I am promoting my work, on the grounds that it may be of interest to some who read here.

As for changing stance. I can only apologise. I wasn't aware that I had. I continue to look at different perspectives, however, and I am often swayed. My views remain pretty much the same, there are so many unanswered questions. Until we know, one way or another, we can only surmise based on the evidence available and our own judgment. I have read lots of interesting opinions and theories on this case, and I have a few of my own, but nothing I could take a firm stance on.

As you are a published author and I take it that your work has been sub-edited, you use far too many commas imo as I have highlighted.
[b] I am afraid that appalling grammar is all my own.

I did not mean to post more on this topic but you've just quoted me and added remarks without quote marks so that it is not at all clear which parts are yours or mine.
As for not advertising plumbing or electricals - advertising anything isn't really ethical imo.
Of course it is perfectly all right to state that you have written a book and the relevance of the subject to the site. But seeing that you say that Maddie was a much loved child, how does that equate with abused children?
It's just that you seem to be using the site to promote yourself - especially by creating three separate topics on your own life and work.
I really wish you all the best with your book, I did not use the words 'appalling grammar' by the way. A good editor would have pointed the overuse of commas out to you.

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Guest on 19.07.12 13:55

Spelling, punctuation marks and grammar should really not be used to pull apart members posts. We are here to discuss Madeleine and I can't really see why this is brought into the discussion. Totally unnecessary.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Cristobell on 19.07.12 13:58

@aquila wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@aquila wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@Spaniel wrote:The lesson is obvious Cristobell.

Those who are terrified of CR, as you admit you are, shouldn't write a blog about this case.


I beg to differ Spaniel, it makes us more creative - and thoughtful, perhaps.
Or stifled.

or self-seeking.


Self-seeking definitely. I am a writer and I have a book to promote

Why not do it somewhere else in the normal channels.

- so hang me! Other than that, I have followed and commented on this case quite actively for over 5 years. I have posted here more frequently since the closure of my old AOL boards - the YGL and Europe Boards. That I have had a book published whilst I have been a poster, is by accident, rather than design. I am sure many of my old posts will come back to haunt me, lol, I have always used the Cristobell name.

Whilst I can appreciate your fear of advertising (I presume),

This forum is about finding truth for Madeleine. It's not about you or advertising your book or whatever it is you do. Please don't use this forum to promote yourself it's unsavoury to say the least. Your change of tact is so obvious. I shall not post another reply to you. Do your best to substantiate your post but have a heart and know that this is not the place to promote yourself.

I am an active member of this forum, and my book is about child abuse, a subject that is also of interest to many members. That it is of benefit to me personally, is a bonus, I have to make a living like anyone else. That I have chosen to blog on a topic I know quite a bit a about, is my choice, and I am merely letting readers here, know I have done a blog that is relevant to this forum.



I am letting the forum know about my blog on Madeleine, Aguila, so what normal channel do you suggest?

I am not sure what you mean with emotive words like unsavoury and 'have a heart', can you please clarify?

Do you honestly think I have spent over 5 years writing about this case in order to infiltrate your forum, that is freely available to view, without joining. My views on this case are widely available. For the moment I am trying to open discussion, because nothing will ever be learned in an environment of open warfare.


Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by tigger on 19.07.12 14:07

candyfloss wrote:Spelling, punctuation marks and grammar should really not be used to pull apart members posts. We are here to discuss Madeleine and I can't really see why this is brought into the discussion. Totally unnecessary.

I apologise Candyfloss, that's why I also said that I never mentioned appalling grammar - got carried away as we had a recent discussion on the word 'of' .
I agree that the grammar is irrelevant as long as the meaning is clear and I often wish I'd edited my own posts more diligently.

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 41
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Cristobell on 19.07.12 14:13

@tigger wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@tigger wrote:Christobel wrote:
[...] Whilst I can appreciate your fear of advertising (I presume), I am an active member of this forum,! and my book is about child abuse, a subject that is also of interest to many members. That it is of benefit to me personally,! is a bonus, I have to make a living like anyone else. That I have chosen to blog on a topic I know quite a bit a about,! is my choice,! and I am merely letting readers here,! know I have done a blog that is relevant to this forum.
unquote

It is difficult to have a discussion with anyone who changes their stance as often as you do. It is clear from earlier posts that you seem to have moved much closer to the official story as given by the McCanns.

Re the bolded sentence: it seems to be a contradiction in terms, if it is a surprise that it is of personal benefit - then 'having to make a living' doesn't follow. Only as a reason for posting your advertisements is that a valid argument imo.


I don't think I did express surprise, though do please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, the book is something that happened along the way, that I have an interest in the mccann case is incidental. I am not advertising plumbing or electricals tigger, I am promoting my work, on the grounds that it may be of interest to some who read here.

As for changing stance. I can only apologise. I wasn't aware that I had. I continue to look at different perspectives, however, and I am often swayed. My views remain pretty much the same, there are so many unanswered questions. Until we know, one way or another, we can only surmise based on the evidence available and our own judgment. I have read lots of interesting opinions and theories on this case, and I have a few of my own, but nothing I could take a firm stance on.

As you are a published author and I take it that your work has been sub-edited, you use far too many commas imo as I have highlighted.
[b] I am afraid that appalling grammar is all my own.

I did not mean to post more on this topic but you've just quoted me and added remarks without quote marks so that it is not at all clear which parts are yours or mine.
As for not advertising plumbing or electricals - advertising anything isn't really ethical imo.
Of course it is perfectly all right to state that you have written a book and the relevance of the subject to the site. But seeing that you say that Maddie was a much loved child, how does that equate with abused children?
It's just that you seem to be using the site to promote yourself - especially by creating three separate topics on your own life and work.
I really wish you all the best with your book, I did not use the words 'appalling grammar' by the way. A good editor would have pointed the overuse of commas out to you.




It does indeed seem as though book etc, has come along, one thing after another, and I do apologise, just the way life happens sometimes, and unlikely to happen again. As for advertising, it is the lifeblood of the publishing industry, and I mentioned my book and blogs, because they are relevant to the interests of this forum. Probably taking advantage of the fact that I am a member and I post here.




Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Guest on 19.07.12 14:25

Let's put it this way, if I wrote a book I would sure as hell tell people about it here. Why wouldn't I? Just ask yourselves if you would do the same........ wouldn't you give it a plug and maybe even want to discuss it and have opinions on it?

Tony advertises his work here or used to, until forced otherwise by shh you know who. Pat Brown advertised her book here. We all advertise people's blogs on a daily basis with links and copy and pastes. What is all the fuss about.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by Spaniel on 19.07.12 16:08

I am so sick and tired of the grammar police on this forum.

I had no idea that we were all sitting an English grammar exam.

Writers are notorious for their dreadful punctuation and that's why proof readers are employed to correct it, usually by the agent before sending to a publisher. If an author stopped to correct every comma, the flow of the story would be lost.

Cristobell, due to your dreadful experiences, perhaps you don't know what makes a child feel loved and wanted. It's easy to think that even a semblance of kindness is normality when treated as you were.

Believe me, it's not being separated from their parents every day, nor missing out on the experience of trying new tastes with their parents of an evening on a foreign holiday. My parents would never have treated us that way, nor did we to our daughter and nor to my knowledge, has any one of my relatives ever treated their children as the McCanns did.



I too know how vicious those Nuns can be. Six strokes of the cane for wearing winter gloves with my summer blazer was rather OTT. I was a day girl though, so returned to normality and a loving family at 4pm.

Poor Madeleine was collected from daycare, bath, then bed to be left without her parents yet again, 'till the whole pattern started again the next day. Note I didn't say "alone", as I'm not convinced of that yet.

So, frankly I don't think you are qualified to judge whether Madeleine was "much loved" as you didn't have a normal, loving upbringing yourself.
avatar
Spaniel

Posts : 742
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-01-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine McCann - A Rational Discourse - new blog

Post by russiandoll on 19.07.12 17:55

ok a rational discourse.....
from me to you
russiandoll wrote: Could I ask you one simple question, please?
Do you, on the basis of the published files which you mention above, some of which I take it you have read, believe that Madeleine was abducted as claimed, some time between 9 and 10 pm on 3rd May 2007, from apartment 5a Ocean Club, Praia da Luz?

in same reply to me:
I wish I could answer with 100% certainty one way or the other Russiandoll

I don't think for one moment things happened as told on the night of 3rd May

you seem 100% certain here, that the answer to my question is NO.

You are rather confusing me with what seems in one sentence like an on the fence position, then almost next words are a reference to the couple being dishonest.
If you do not accept their version of abduction, what do you think happened to the child? You state very clearly that her parents are desperate to find her, accepting that they must have no knowledge of her whereabouts. This fits with abduction, so if you do not believe she was abducted, what is the reason for her parents not knowing what has become of her?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

avatar
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2011-09-11

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