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.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


Sunday Times apology

Post new topic   Reply to topic

Page 11 of 14 Previous  1 ... 7 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Guest on 31.12.13 19:07

Clay Regazzoni wrote:

You never come across anybody who's been interested in this case since before 3rd May 2007, do you. Now that's one journalist I would like to hear from.

***
 sarcastic
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Woofer on 31.12.13 19:13

@ Daisy -  What does "fill ya boots" mean?  I`ve never heard it before - is it a Yorkshire term?
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Daisy on 31.12.13 19:24

@Woofer wrote:I always (outwardly) take people at face value as well, although I do keep my con-person radar going at the same time.  Its no good showing hostility where none has been shown.

As time went on, there were a few alarm bells set off that OTH was merely on a wind-up, especially when he said on another thread that GA couldn`t sue the MSM for libel in this country because he had no reputation in this country to be defamed because no one knew him.
I'm the same Woofer. in real life I'm (hopefully) considered amiable and most forgiving. I've been labelled a bleeding heart many of times for my so called 'soft' views. I wouldn't like to change that though because that's who I am.

Question: Can you accept, that some peoples alarm bells go off a little earlier than yours in some instances?

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by tiny on 31.12.13 19:25

@justthinking wrote:I agree Cristobell - there is nothing to fear in having someone with detailed expert knowledge on the forum, especially in such a specialised area that few people work in.

Do we really know that he/she has worked for two decades in tv news or are we going on his/her say so.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Woofer on 31.12.13 19:27

@Daisy wrote:
@Woofer wrote:I always (outwardly) take people at face value as well, although I do keep my con-person radar going at the same time.  Its no good showing hostility where none has been shown.

As time went on, there were a few alarm bells set off that OTH was merely on a wind-up, especially when he said on another thread that GA couldn`t sue the MSM for libel in this country because he had no reputation in this country to be defamed because no one knew him.
I'm the same Woofer. in real life I'm (hopefully) considered amiable and most forgiving. I've been labelled a bleeding heart many of times for my so called 'soft' views. I wouldn't like to change that though because that's who I am.

Question: Can you accept, that some peoples alarm bells go off a little earlier than yours in some instances?

Ha ha - yes  big grin
avatar
Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Daisy on 31.12.13 19:31

@Woofer wrote:@ Daisy -  What does "fill ya boots" mean?  I`ve never heard it before - is it a Yorkshire term?
I can't claim it as a Yorkshire saying Woofer, not sure where it originates (can't be arsed looking) but it means Knock yourself out, Get your fill, that sort of thing. Nothing disrespectful you understand.  smilie

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Cristobell on 31.12.13 19:43

@tiny wrote:
@justthinking wrote:I agree Cristobell - there is nothing to fear in having someone with detailed expert knowledge on the forum, especially in such a specialised area that few people work in.

Do we really know that he/she has worked for two decades in tv news or are we going on his/her say so.


What else can we go on? Surely all of us can only be judged on our say so. If someone doesn't know what they are talking about, it soon becomes clear and they lose credibility. Give someone enough rope and all that. Imo, OTH hasn't had much chance to say very much at all as the debate (on this thread) had become bogged down with a stand off on points of law. I would have preferred to have discussed other issues with him/her.

There is nothing that we or OTH can do about the reporting that has gone on in the past, there will be plenty of time for recriminations after. In the meantime, as we are all seeking justice for Madeleine, does it really matter who OTH is? We are all discerning adults, and quite capable of reaching our own conclusions.I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?

Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Guest on 31.12.13 19:50

@Cristobell wrote:[ [...]
 Imo, OTH hasn't had much chance to say very much at all as the debate (on this thread) had become bogged down with a stand off on points of law.  I would have preferred to have discussed other issues with him/her.  

There is nothing that we or OTH can do about the reporting that has gone on in the past, there will be plenty of time for recriminations after.  In the meantime, as we are all seeking justice for Madeleine, does it really matter who OTH is?  We are all discerning adults, and quite capable of reaching our own conclusions.I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    
***
OTH has made 80+ comments in this thread only.
It doesn't matter, who they are, but it looks as though they're not who they say they are ...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Casey5 on 31.12.13 20:08

Cristobell wrote:
I don't read it that way.  The Gaspars must have been in terrible turmoil and must have been tormenting themselves with thoughts of 'what if we are wrong'.  If we put ourselves in their position within a group of our own friends we can start to imagine how they felt.   

I've always felt sorry for the Gaspars. They witnessed something that made them uneasy when on holiday with a group of friends including the McCanns.
Then they learn that the McCann's daughter has gone missing from a holiday which included people whose actions had made them uneasy on their own holiday.
They informed the police, made statements and expected them to remain confidential unless they would be required in a trial, I would imagine.
Then they find their statements spread all over the internet, their holiday companions alerted to the fact that they, the Gaspars, felt inclined to contact the police and goodness knows how their medical colleagues reacted.
In hindsight they would maybe be inclined to remain silent or at least think twice.
As for David Payne, although I find it difficult to feel pity for any of the tapas 9, he has certainly been judged guilty of something inappropriate by a lot of people - he may be guilty or he may not but it's surely one of the worst things a man can be gossiped about.
Just my opinion.

Casey5

Posts : 342
Reputation : 45
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Okeydokey on 31.12.13 20:10

Châtelaine wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:[ [...]
Yes. I think it's the very fact that they'd have been in an acute state of agitation about such a potentially damaging admission regarding their friends that makes the Gasper statement so credible. Their moral strength when it would have been so easy to give a rueful shake of the head and say 'we must be mistaken' and avoid such a dilemma is admirable, convinces me of their honesty and that their statement must be true and precise.

OTH is wrong on this, I think.
***
I agree.
And I have never seen a genuine  explanation, why the PJ got these statements with months delay ...

I don't know but I have a theory. I think there was a government-run multi-agency committee dealing with all sensitive issues relating to the McCann case.  I think it was held up by that committee for several months. It is astounding it was held up for so long - as clearly (whether or not the concerns were well founded) it was vital evidence that the PJ should have been made aware of immediately. Another thing about the Gaspar statement is I think it was written to make it sound as weak as possible, albeit not actually misrepresenting what the witnesses were reporting. There are various ways witness statements can be put together!

Okeydokey

Posts : 938
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by tiny on 31.12.13 20:17

@Cristobell wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@justthinking wrote:I agree Cristobell - there is nothing to fear in having someone with detailed expert knowledge on the forum, especially in such a specialised area that few people work in.

Do we really know that he/she has worked for two decades in tv news or are we going on his/her say so.


What else can we go on?  Surely all of us can only be judged on our say so.  If someone doesn't know what they are talking about, it soon becomes clear and they lose credibility.  Give someone enough rope and all that.  Imo, OTH hasn't had much chance to say very much at all as the debate (on this thread) had become bogged down with a stand off on points of law.  I would have preferred to have discussed other issues with him/her.  

There is nothing that we or OTH can do about the reporting that has gone on in the past, there will be plenty of time for recriminations after.  In the meantime, as we are all seeking justice for Madeleine, does it really matter who OTH is?  We are all discerning adults, and quite capable of reaching our own conclusions.I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    
nobody said oth was threat as far as I am aware, but he didn't come over as someone in the know as he said he was.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Daisy on 31.12.13 20:17

@Cristobell wrote:
@tiny wrote:
@justthinking wrote:I agree Cristobell - there is nothing to fear in having someone with detailed expert knowledge on the forum, especially in such a specialised area that few people work in.

Do we really know that he/she has worked for two decades in tv news or are we going on his/her say so.


What else can we go on?  Surely all of us can only be judged on our say so.  If someone doesn't know what they are talking about, it soon becomes clear and they lose credibility.  Give someone enough rope and all that.  Imo, OTH hasn't had much chance to say very much at all as the debate (on this thread) had become bogged down with a stand off on points of law.  I would have preferred to have discussed other issues with him/her.  

There is nothing that we or OTH can do about the reporting that has gone on in the past, there will be plenty of time for recriminations after.  In the meantime, as we are all seeking justice for Madeleine, does it really matter who OTH is?  We are all discerning adults, and quite capable of reaching our own conclusions.I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    
How much rope is enough?

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Okeydokey on 31.12.13 20:29

@tiny wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@tiny wrote:
   
nobody said oth was threat as far as I am aware, but he didn't come over as someone in the know as he said he was.

I agree Tiny. The point about OTH is that he/she was saying in effect "I have expertise in this area and my opinion carries more authority than yours. "

However his/her ignorance of things like the law on defamation has been demonstrated here. It is important people should not be allowed to claim authoritative status if they can't justify it. If OTH has simply been given his views that would have been different.

Okeydokey

Posts : 938
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Tony Bennett on 31.12.13 20:55

@Cristobell wrote:
I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    

Be very careful Cristobell not to put words into other people's mouths.

Has anyone on this thread said that OTH is a 'threat'? If so, I can't recall it.

I summarised earlier some of the main things OTH has been trying to tell us:

1. The Gaspar statements are just innuendo and a 'misunderstanding'

2. There are 'few facts' in the case

3. Some forum members are beastly to newcomers

4. The PJ statements should never have been released to the public, and

5. Amaral is wrong about what happened to Madeleine.


Simple question back to you. Is someone making dozens of posts on those topics (plus getting libel laws and other things wrong) helpful to this forum? Or unhelpful?

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14939
Reputation : 3019
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Cristobell on 31.12.13 21:26

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    

Be very careful Cristobell not to put words into other people's mouths.

Has anyone on this thread said that OTH is a 'threat'? If so, I can't recall it.

I summarised earlier some of the main things OTH has been trying to tell us:

1. The Gaspar statements are just innuendo and a 'misunderstanding'

2. There are 'few facts' in the case

3. Some forum members are beastly to newcomers

4. The PJ statements should never have been released to the public, and

5. Amaral is wrong about what happened to Madeleine.


Simple question back to you. Is someone making dozens of posts on those topics (plus getting libel laws and other things wrong) helpful to this forum? Or unhelpful?


Apologies for using the word' threat', perhaps I should have said the problem with OTH posting on this forum. We are all discerning adults and can sort the wheat from the chaff.

As to whether his/her contribution to the forum would be helpful or unhelpful, that is presently an unknown quantity. But the same could be said of any of us, some things we post may be helpful, some may not. None of us know what happened to Madeleine MCCann, therefore we cannot say definitely what is helpful and what is not.

The five points of contention you have highlighted above are merely variations on topics we have all discussed many times over the years. Differences of opinion provides a subject for debate, any one of those statements can be challenged by yourself, or indeed anyone else on this forum, and with reasoned argument you may be able to persuade OTH (and readers) towards your own conclusions.

Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Okeydokey on 31.12.13 21:40

@Cristobell wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
I am at a loss to understand what the perceived threat from OTH is, perhaps someone can enlighten me?    

Be very careful Cristobell not to put words into other people's mouths.

Has anyone on this thread said that OTH is a 'threat'? If so, I can't recall it.

I summarised earlier some of the main things OTH has been trying to tell us:

1. The Gaspar statements are just innuendo and a 'misunderstanding'

2. There are 'few facts' in the case

3. Some forum members are beastly to newcomers

4. The PJ statements should never have been released to the public, and

5. Amaral is wrong about what happened to Madeleine.


Simple question back to you. Is someone making dozens of posts on those topics (plus getting libel laws and other things wrong) helpful to this forum? Or unhelpful?


Apologies for using the word' threat', perhaps I should have said the problem with OTH posting on this forum.  We are all discerning adults and can sort the wheat from the chaff.  

As to whether his/her contribution to the forum would be helpful or unhelpful, that is presently an unknown quantity.  But the same could be said of any of us, some things we post may be helpful, some may not.  None of us know what happened to Madeleine MCCann, therefore we cannot say definitely what is helpful and what is not.  

The five points of contention you have highlighted above are merely variations on topics we have all discussed many times over the years.  Differences of opinion provides a subject for debate, any one of those statements can be challenged by yourself, or indeed anyone else on this forum, and with reasoned argument you may be able to persuade OTH (and readers) towards your own conclusions.  

I think OTH's contributions have been unhelpful because he has been spreading misinformation e.g. the false claim that reports of foreign libel trials enjoy no legal privilege in the UK.

Okeydokey

Posts : 938
Reputation : 31
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by tigger on 31.12.13 21:51

Cristobell wrote:
Differences of opinion provides a subject for debate, any one of those statements can be challenged by yourself, or indeed anyone else on this forum, ....
Unquote

Lately I'm afraid I have not found this to be the case. Which is why I avoid certain topics, such as this one.

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

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Daisy on 31.12.13 21:55

@tigger wrote:Cristobell wrote:
Differences of opinion provides a subject for debate, any one of those statements can be challenged by yourself, or indeed anyone else on this forum, ....
Unquote

Lately I'm afraid I have not found this to be the case. Which is why I avoid certain topics, such as this one.
Yes, it's like treading on eggshells of late around here. It's the reason I've refrained from contributing too. Sad state of affairs.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Hongkong Phooey on 31.12.13 22:15

@Casey5 wrote:Cristobell wrote:
I don't read it that way.  The Gaspars must have been in terrible turmoil and must have been tormenting themselves with thoughts of 'what if we are wrong'.  If we put ourselves in their position within a group of our own friends we can start to imagine how they felt.   

I've always felt sorry for the Gaspars. They witnessed something that made them uneasy when on holiday with a group of friends including the McCanns.
Then they learn that the McCann's daughter has gone missing from a holiday which included people whose actions had made them uneasy on their own holiday.
They informed the police, made statements and expected them to remain confidential unless they would be required in a trial, I would imagine.
Then they find their statements spread all over the internet, their holiday companions alerted to the fact that they, the Gaspars, felt inclined to contact the police and goodness knows how their medical colleagues reacted.
In hindsight they would maybe be inclined to remain silent or at least think twice.
As for David Payne, although I find it difficult to feel pity for any of the tapas 9, he has certainly been judged guilty of something inappropriate by a lot of people - he may be guilty or he may not but it's surely one of the worst things a man can be gossiped about.
Just my opinion.
Dr Amaral seems to think it is a bit more than just gossiping, in fact he brought up that topic in his recent TV interview.
avatar
Hongkong Phooey

Posts : 310
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-10-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by bobbin on 31.12.13 22:23

@Daisy wrote:
@tigger wrote:Cristobell wrote:
Differences of opinion provides a subject for debate, any one of those statements can be challenged by yourself, or indeed anyone else on this forum, ....
Unquote

Lately I'm afraid I have not found this to be the case. Which is why I avoid certain topics, such as this one.
Yes, it's like treading on eggshells of late around here. It's the reason I've refrained from contributing too. Sad state of affairs.
Likewise. I've had little time to look at the forum to catch up, and time wasting by some posters is clearly obvious.
There's still lots of work to do, going back over old material and seeing it in a new light as more pieces of the jigsaw get put together.
Misinformation is a menace, deliberate misinformation is a time-waster.
Being polite and considerate needs to be tempered also by the ability to be 'discerning', and that means being able to detect the deliberate disrupters who offer nothing but long winded posts that offer nothing, at best, to forward the attempts to bring justice to Madeleine, and at worst, muddy the waters and waste every body's time and patience.
But then, apart from trying to swing opinions, perhaps that is what they are trying (or being paid) to do.
Please do not take my comments as a disincentive to new posters.
There have been many new 'genuine' posters who have brought new insight and valuable material to the forum.
They know who they are, their posts are acknowledged and thanked, and their input is more than welcome.
It should be clear however, after a certain number of posts, that if nothing new is being added to the jigsaw then one must suspect a deliberate nuisance.

bobbin

Posts : 2053
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by Daisy on 31.12.13 22:29

Thank you Bobbin, you put it a lot more eloquently and calmly than I could right now.

____________________
“Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes.”   

Unknown


“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.” 

Friedrich Nietzsche
avatar
Daisy

Posts : 1245
Reputation : 6
Join date : 2011-06-15
Location : Yorkshire, England

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by plebgate on 31.12.13 22:36

@notlongnow wrote:Why are people picking on oth?
please why do people jump in and ask questions like this?  Why not let OTH ask himself if he is bothered?

Somebody further up the thread said he can post his opinion, that is correct but if he has made a statement re.Tony which is not correct  that, imo, should be addressed.

plebgate

Posts : 6199
Reputation : 1852
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by aiyoyo on 31.12.13 22:38

@Cristobell wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:
OTH has every opportunity to respond to this and the request for an apology for suggesting Tony Bennett was found guilty of libel against the McCanns.  Why doesn't OTH do that?
That may depend on exactly who he is  ! !

Exactly, yet it seems strange there are posters willing to accept him at face value !  


I accept everyone at face value Aiyoyo and treat them with respect.  We are communicating via the internet, other than those of us who have revealed our names and faces, we have no idea who we are talking to.  I like to treat people on the internet in the same way that I would treat them in the real world, and I wouldn't dream of interrogating someone I have just met.  

In my opinion OTH has much to bring to this discussion, look forward to what he/she has to say, and hope that they are not put off by the reception they have received thus far.  

That's your prerogative Cristobel!  Good for you that you take people at face value.

Others are free to discern for themselves what to make of poster/s claiming this and that, depending on merits of their posts.
Nothing wrong with that.
 It might help if you don't hide behind the "respect" stick to beat around the bush - not first time either - seems to be a trait typical to you.
Maybe your idea of blanket and blind respect is something I have yet to learn to grasp.

People who are skeptical of any issues have a right raise question about them - that's equally their prerogative.
That's not to say they are any less respectful than you of other posters.
Respect is earned not given and especially not given blindly.

OTH being from MSM supposedly is surely eloquent to defend his stance.


I will have to disagree with you about respect, it has been my experience that if you treat people with respect they usually respond in kind and it leads to a more interesting debate.  Hostility inevitably brings discussion to an end.  

I am not disputing anyone's right to an opinion, I am merely adding mine, which is why I find your last line curious.  I am sure OTH is more than capable of defending his/her stance, I am merely giving my opinion, as you are.    






Damn right too that respect begets respect, and it works both way. In the reverse order too.

So you are saying you respect OTH taking him at face value ya ?
May I ask you to list how he accords this forum with respect in the first place to earn your respect, by the principle of 'Respect begets Respect' ?

By posting misinformation under pretext he's au fait with the way MSM operate observing governance of defamation law ?
If he's a stickler-for-fact-bugger, how did he get his fact wrong about TB? Could it be deliberate ?
When pointed out to him his mistake, IYV, why do you think he neither acknowledge nor retract it ?

It's all very well preaching respect begets respect in the right context.
Otherwise at best it is just a simplistic view; and at worst a pretentious way of taking people at face value without exception.






avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 324
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by plebgate on 31.12.13 22:46

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Okeydokey wrote:
dantezebu wrote:Both quotes from OTH on the subject of the Gaspars statements:

"But suppose you made a statement like the Gaspar one and you realised by now that it was just a big misunderstanding (guys can be very silly when they've had a few drinks), how would you feel that your original statement has been sent around the world for everyone to read? Not even a retraction would repair the damage between you and your (former) friends"

"The problem that someone may decide not to go to the police with their suspicions for fear of the fact that, if they are wrong, it may have terrible repercussions when that statement is made public and they are outed as a witness, as happened in this case when it was shelved"

I don't know who he is or what he does, but what was this all about?

guys being silly???
Gaspars made a mistake?
terrible repercusions?? for who?

All sounds a little personal to me.

Yes OTH seems very concerned about the effects of such statements being made public. But he/she doesn't seem to have any concern about the effects of Team McCann's various statements on the lives of others e.g. Amaral.  And oddly for a UK media person, he/she  shows absolutely no concern about the use of secret court orders in this case. Once again I invite OTH to condemn the secret court order (made when the McCanns were still arguidos) instructing all official agencies to co-operate with them (this order was revealed during the McCanns v Leics Police case).

Why is OTH on here?

Even Cristobell admits that she can't name anything 'positive' he has brought here, she simply says she has high hopes because he says he is a journalist.

To those who will no doubt accuse me of being unfair, sarcastic, beastly to newbies etc. etc., I have to admit that I have a very low threshold for time-wasters
and we all know who they are TB.   So, so tiresome.

I would never take anyone at face value either on internet or real life.   No way Jose.

plebgate

Posts : 6199
Reputation : 1852
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Sunday Times apology

Post by aiyoyo on 31.12.13 22:47

@Daisy wrote:
@Woofer wrote:@ Daisy -  What does "fill ya boots" mean?  I`ve never heard it before - is it a Yorkshire term?
I can't claim it as a Yorkshire saying Woofer, not sure where it originates (can't be arsed looking) but it means Knock yourself out, Get your fill, that sort of thing. Nothing disrespectful you understand.  smilie



I understand. Something to do with having to take it at face value right ? big grin 
avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 324
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 11 of 14 Previous  1 ... 7 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum