Re: Madeleine McCann search to enter 'substantial phase' of activity

by **Tony Bennett** 25.05.14 16:13

russiandoll wrote:
Am I reading this correctly?

REPLY: No

by sofieellis 25.05.14 16:16

Tony Bennett wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Am I reading this correctly?
REPLY: No

Perhaps you would be good enough to explain then, Tony, as I'm afraid I read it exactly the same way that russiandoll did.

by Guest 25.05.14 16:19

sofieellis wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Am I reading this correctly?
REPLY: No

Perhaps you would be good enough to explain then, Tony, as I'm afraid I read it exactly the same way that russiandoll did.

Tony, it is about time you changed your attitude to members here. Quite frankly it would put anyone off joining here. We know you have certain opinions, others do not agree, does not make them trolls, does not make them wrong, none of us know what happened to Madeleine, none of us know what the outcome of Grange will be. Please Tony, try and be a bit more forum friendly......thanks.

by stargazer59 25.05.14 16:22

sofieellis wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Am I reading this correctly?
REPLY: No

Perhaps you would be good enough to explain then, Tony, as I'm afraid I read it exactly the same way that russiandoll did.

Have to agree. as someone who reads more than posts, i am put off from posting nowadays sad

by russiandoll 25.05.14 16:24

I was just about to request the same, sofieellis. I would like to be told how I am wrong to have taken offence at this

" But I suggest that, uT, you may well have an agenda in seeking to grossly minimise his role and importance in the Madeleine McCann mystery "

after a correction by Tony to some points made by Ut on the Op Grange Whitewash thread.

The list of corrections [ if in fact the list by Tony was correct] was enough without the insult to Ut.

Also, Tony's innuendo to Atomic Peanut.... " it's ok. I know why you are here "

is provocative and unpleasant.

So please enlighten me , Tony, as to what it is you object to from these posters and why you feel you have the right to address them in the manner which has now sadly become a bad habit.

eta... Don't want this thread to go off-topic so last from me here re Tony's behaviour. I will from now try to ignore it and hope that it changes, but I feel as if I should defend people from what I see as a needless attack on their motives for being here.

by Woofer 25.05.14 16:45

Tony`s confidence in a whitewash makes me wonder if he knows things that we don`t.

by Cristobell 25.05.14 16:50

Woofer wrote:Tony`s confidence in a whitewash makes me wonder if he knows things that we don`t.

Not so sure it is confidence Woofer, rather a loss of faith of British justice.

by Markus 2 25.05.14 17:23

Cristobell wrote:
Woofer wrote:Tony`s confidence in a whitewash makes me wonder if he knows things that we don`t.
Not so sure it is confidence Woofer, rather a loss of faith of British justice.

Exactly

I fear Tony is going to be right, Murat and the Russian have always been dubious and there is still a big ? imo
Another thing, it is difficult to understand why Kate is out there proclaiming her innocence yet so many people are covering up for them, how would you cope with that, trying to convince people you are innocent, yet all the time knowing a large percentage know you aren't?

You have to look who is really ruling this country, not Prime Ministers not the Government but a higher elite cult and if you don't tow the line look out.

The thing is that they only defend their own for so long so if there ever is a chink in the armour and it can be proven that they are guilty then they will be left to fight on their own, this is how it goes. Like Lenny Harper he never had the nerve to follow on investigating HDLG imo, threatened probably and this would be the same for Redwood, chicken out.

by TozerDerry 25.05.14 17:39

The problem is that there are very few known facts and many disparate beliefs. Often complex situations are only understandable long after the event. Anyone other than the perpetrators claiming to KNOW what happened (including police Portuguese or English) is deluded. All we have is belief and supposition, not true knowledge. Such is life.

by sallypelt 25.05.14 17:45

I think it's time we reminded our self why this sorry saga is such a difficult one to crack: THERE IS NO BODY! And when you add into the mix, the PR behind the McCann's, it makes it easier to understand why SY is having such a hard time. It's worth remembering, that before the 1954? Act came into law, it was law that without a body there could be no conviction.

Read about the Campden Wonder, and this will put into perspective what the MET is up against. As for the corruption within the police force, I totally understand why so many fear a "cover-up" but even though I have my doubts, like others, that this case will be buried without trace, I try to remind myself what SY is up against. The very mention of Brian George Kennedy is enough to put anyone in to a spin, with all his multiple companies he has his finger in, and they aren't small companies.

by Guest 25.05.14 17:55

Strange isn't it. I am getting on in years now (admit I'm an OAP) but in my youth the figures of trust were the police and doctors ! Do you, would you, put your

complete faith in such professions nowadays ?

by TozerDerry 25.05.14 17:58

sallypelt wrote:I think it's time we reminded our self why this sorry saga is such a difficult one to crack: THERE IS NO BODY! And when you add into the mix, the PR behind the McCann's, it makes it easier to understand why SY is having such a hard time. It's worth remembering, that before the 1954? Act came into law, it was law that without a body there could be no conviction.

Read about the Campden Wonder, and this will put into perspective what the MET is up against. As for the corruption within the police force, I totally understand why so many fear a "cover-up" but even though I have my doubts, like others, that this case will be buried without trace, I try to remind myself what SY is up against. The very mention of Brian George Kennedy is enough to put anyone in to a spin, with all his multiple companies he has his finger in, and they aren't small companies.

Even with a body and a body of evidence, a firm conclusion is not always possible. Look at the number of apparently solid convictions that have been overturned by later evidence that not only makes a conviction unsafe but completely indefensible- not loopholes but clear proof that the police and courts were completely in error.

I suspect that this case will still be in dispute in many year's time.

by Snifferdog 25.05.14 18:06

Hi Daffodil. I would never put my full trust in the police or any doctor, or anyone else, be they president queen or prime minister, because just like any other human, they are all fallible.

by Mirage 25.05.14 18:08

daffodil wrote:

Strange isn't it. I am getting on in years now (admit I'm an OAP) but in my youth the figures of trust were the police and doctors ! Do you, would you, put your

complete faith in such professions nowadays ?

Same here, daffodil, OAP now and I totally agree with your sentiments and often say the same. And no, I cannot take people on face value any more, especially where children are concerned. I would add priests to the list of those I was brought up to trust and respect. No longer, I'm afraid.

by TozerDerry 25.05.14 18:11

daffodil wrote:

Strange isn't it. I am getting on in years now (admit I'm an OAP) but in my youth the figures of trust were the police and doctors ! Do you, would you, put your
High level corruption a generation ago.
complete faith in such professions nowadays ?

According to the IPSOS Veracity index 88%of people trust doctors to tell the truth and 63% trust the police.

Police are more trustworthy now than ever when looking back on endemic low and high level corruption a generation ago.

by **PeterMac** 25.05.14 18:21

We could start a list, and rank them in order

Lawyers
Police
Doctors
Politicians
Spin Doctors
Spokes-persons
PR gurus
Himmler
Pinocchio
Tapas 7
McCanns

by Guest 25.05.14 18:28

Journalists

by Guest 25.05.14 18:30

PM I somehow think you have that list in the wrong order thinking

@ Mirage - Oh yes, forgot priests.

@ TozerDerry - Mori polls are something else I would not trust

by aiyoyo 25.05.14 18:31

PeterMac wrote:We could start a list, and rank them in order

Lawyers
Police
Doctors
Politicians
Spin Doctors
Spokes-persons
PR gurus
Himmler
Pinocchio
Tapas 7
McCanns

All of the above, but not sure I agree with the order.

Spokes-persons, Spin Doctors, McCanns, Tapas 7 must come before the Police in that order.

by TozerDerry 25.05.14 18:35

daffodil wrote:
PM I somehow think you have that list in the wrong order

@ Mirage - Oh yes, forgot priests.

@ TozerDerry - Mori polls are something else I would not trust

What reason would you have to disgust a simple veracity poll. If that is not evidence, what is?

by unchained melody 25.05.14 18:36

Our system of capitalism makes it fine for someone to be an absolute bullshitter, long as you are making
money from it

by Mirage 25.05.14 18:43

GCHQ
I feel my antennae twitching whenever I drive past.

by lj 25.05.14 18:45

Angelique wrote:aiyoyo

"Read elsewhere industrial equipment will be brought in for dig, meaning they are thinking seriously
hard solid ground, could even be concrete ......! God only knows what's cooking but hopefully they know what they are doing."

Could it be the roadworks being carried out at the time ?

Those have been searched so thoroughly by just anyone you can think of.

I would not be amazed though if they did. All part of the "look how thorough we are, your money is well spent" plan.

by Guest 25.05.14 18:49

TozerDerry wrote:
daffodil wrote:
PM I somehow think you have that list in the wrong order

@ Mirage - Oh yes, forgot priests.

@ TozerDerry - Mori polls are something else I would not trust
What reason would you have to disgust a simple veracity poll. If that is not evidence, what is?

I do have the right to post my own opinion. I do not consider the opinion of 1,828 people qualifying enough to be a general consensus of public opinion considering the population of England and Wales (sorry I cannot quote the precise population at present nor the percentage this would represent). A poll of a small number of people is not enough IMO for accurate assessment.

Poll for the Police Federatio
Published:20 May 2014
Fieldwork:9 - 12 May 2014
Theme:Crime & Policing
Keywords:Crime, Police, Trade Unions
(Click on keywords to find related Research)
The Police Federation today published its results from an online survey on public perceptions of the police force in England and Wales. The Ipsos MORI poll of 1,828 people, covers confidence in the police force, perceptions of public safety and the ability of the police to do a good job.

by Woofer 25.05.14 18:50

Mirage wrote:
daffodil wrote:

Strange isn't it. I am getting on in years now (admit I'm an OAP) but in my youth the figures of trust were the police and doctors ! Do you, would you, put your

complete faith in such professions nowadays ?
Same here, daffodil, OAP now and I totally agree with your sentiments and often say the same. And no, I cannot take people on face value any more, especially where children are concerned. I would add priests to the list of those I was brought up to trust and respect. No longer, I'm afraid.

.... and vicars - I had a relationship with one once and he had no morals at all yet still held forth in the pulpit on a Sunday and of course just loved to use his dog collar for privileges. I`ll say no more.

by Guest 25.05.14 18:56

Mirage wrote:
daffodil wrote:

Strange isn't it. I am getting on in years now (admit I'm an OAP) but in my youth the figures of trust were the police and doctors ! Do you, would you, put your

complete faith in such professions nowadays ?
Same here, daffodil, OAP now and I totally agree with your sentiments and often say the same. And no, I cannot take people on face value any more, especially where children are concerned. I would add priests to the list of those I was brought up to trust and respect. No longer, I'm afraid.

I believe the lack of trust in politicians, media, police etc. as well as anger and disgust at the morality and greed pervading this country is the reason why voters are protesting and backing UKIP, not that they necessarily support UKIP's policies.

by lj 25.05.14 19:01

margaret wrote:
Bishop Brennan wrote:
margaret wrote:
How do you know it's not allowed by SY? Redwood also said Maddie leaving the apartment alive may not follow with their thinking.

Right. So option 1 or 3. But, SY have said from day 1 that the parents / T7 are not suspects; they have been updating them regularly; they have not reinterviewed any of the T9; senior SY officers have rubbished the idea on radio. Right now, the McCann's are outside of the SY investigative remit based on ALL the information and evidence given by AR and all of his superiors. It would require a major bit of evidence to be discovered (probably by PJ) to persuade them otherwise.

I thought they only said they were not suspects at the beginning, and that was to satisfy the press and not cause a media storm. We don't know if they have re interviewed the tapas lot and we probably wouldn't be told the truth if they had, as for keeping the Mccanns informed to what extent? We don't know, they could be hold the bare minimum but you could still say they had 'been informed.'

One thing SY are keen to do is not have speculation in the press to jeopardise justice, they said as much about the digs. IMO that ties in with trying to catch the Mccanns. If it was anyone else you'd think arresting them and hauling them in they might talk, so why do the digs before arrest? Is it because they know the suspects won't admit anything unless there's irrefutable evidence tying them to maddies disappearance?

So you do believe the "Madeleine might not have been alive", but you don't the"the McCanns and Tapas 7 are not suspects or persons of interest" and the "as if the abduction occurred in Britain". That's cherry picking.
The recent statements from the higher ups (sorry I keep on forgetting their names) make it clear that their goal still is find a solution that will ease the parents suffering. That says enough.

by Guest 25.05.14 19:09

[quote="Woofer
.... and vicars - I had a relationship with one once and he had no morals at all yet still held forth in the pulpit on a Sunday and of course just loved to use his dog collar for privileges. I`ll say no more.[/quote]

drama

It may be OT but you cannot leave us wondering Woofer.

by missmar1 25.05.14 19:27

Years ago, anyone in a position of trust ie, Doctors, Teachers, Policemen and vicars ect.... were above suspicion and could do just about whatever they pleased in private -safe in the knowledge that they would get away with it because no -one would even think to question their actions - I,m talking about their behaviour towards children.

These people were seen as pillars of society and whatever they got up to - if caught, it was either ignored, disbelieved or hushed up. Its still going on today - and will continue to do so, because as long as we have these sick perverts roaming about appearing in their everyday lives as solid members/pillars of society, we will be worried sick for our little children. The tide has been turning over the years, and ordinary everyday people are now aware they have a voice and are fully prepared to report these sickos and hopefully they will continue to be exposed. Modern day children are being believed and encouraged to come forward. Also, we are all better educated in these matters - especially children by their well informed and not so trusting modern parents, as a result, these sick "pillars" and celebs of society are being ousted more and more .....

eta, sorry I think I have put this on the wrong thread - admin please move if so.

by MarleneP 25.05.14 19:29

@ [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 3:45 pm
Thank you. That's what I was looking for. About the Aztecs cloth has been much discussion in the A3 forum.