[Archived] The Mccann Saga

[3rdpillar]

back to the mcanns, as i said earlier, unless the mccanns are tried for something / anything to do with their children in a public court, we aint gonna know what evidence there is or its scource. Everything is speculation.

I do think however, large sums of money are changing hands for leaked infromation which has a link to the evidence.

Speculation in our office curently surrounds the Mcanns comitting suiside before charges are brought. as they cant humanly keep inside their secrets..

[Rovermatt]

Exactly- I was making a point about the Mccans not about politics, the other month I posted a point about Rome (TV series)and how much I enjoyed the series- next breath someone( whom ive never even spoken to/debated with) is wading in with both feet saying how they don’t agree with my view o fpolitics WTF

If I remember correctly the comment you refer to could hardly be described as 'wading in with both feet.' Anyway, you're completely missing the point. You claim that Sidders remarks reflect his dislike of your political views. This is pure conjecture on your part.

The McCanns may be acting strangely in the eyes of some but the unrelenting stress and emotional turmoil they are suffering, along with the hysterical media coverage (due in no small part to their own efforts to keep the story in the news of course), is bound to take its toll in visible but unpredictable ways. They are not responsible for their daughter's disappearance. She was clearly abducted and any other more sensational angle is likely the product of the press's cynical ploy to sell more papers to a voyeuristic public. The campaign they have engaged in is completely genuine in my view; they had an audience with the Pope for goodness sake.

I really do hope the child is found-dead or alive-so that some closure can be had. Then we can focus perhaps on all the other missing kids around Europe.

[ABBEY]

. She was clearly abducted and any other more sensational angle is likely the product of the press's cynical ploy to sell more papers to a voyeuristic public. The campaign they have engaged in is completely genuine in my view; they had an audience with the Pope for goodness sake.

I really do hope the child is found-dead or alive-so that some closure can be had. Then we can focus perhaps on all the other missing kids around Europe.

why was she "clearly" abductucted?the police dont seem to think so

an audience with the pope ???

what difference does that make?? i once met phil lynott no relevence to anything but there again neither as the pope.

[Rovermatt]

why was she "clearly" abductucted?the police dont seem to think so

an audience with the pope ???

what difference does that make?? i once met phil lynott no relevence to anything but there again neither as the pope.

Phil Lynott wasn't the head of the Catholic Church (at least I don't think he was).

[ABBEY]

matt just because they met the pope doesnt mean anything really does it...or that there innocent or guilty ,they had a meeting with a person .

[Rovermatt]

I see your point but there's no need to meet a leading religious figure (or any leading world figure for that matter) if you're guilty. There's covering yourself and then there's being genuinely desperate. Let's hope they're desperate.

[Claytons Left Boot]

The McCanns may be acting strangely in the eyes of some but the unrelenting stress and emotional turmoil they are suffering, along with the hysterical media coverage (due in no small part to their own efforts to keep the story in the news of course), is bound to take its toll in visible but unpredictable ways. They are not responsible for their daughter's disappearance. She was clearly abducted and any other more sensational angle is likely the product of the press's cynical ploy to sell more papers to a voyeuristic public. The campaign they have engaged in is completely genuine in my view; they had an audience with the Pope for goodness sake.

I think that pretty much sums it up Matt.

[Flopsy]

If I'd had my child stolen I'd be asking everyone from help, the head of the Catholic, Anglican, every Muslim Sect, hindu, mormons, Scientologists and even David bloody Ike.

Although the fact that you're clinging onto god helping you, when if you belive in him, you have to face up to the fact that he's done it to you in the first place must be a bit of a pain in the arse

[Oklahoma]

I have no idea what happened and I think that, as usual, the press is just rubish.

Some things are strange and I think that it will be answered with time. The Birmingham lab results aren't over yet. Let's see what comes from there.

And I wouldn't worry about the McCanns, they have friends in very high places (your PM, for example) and have managed to get very well paid representatives to defend them.

[Cheeky Sidders]

Not as much as you, At least grow some balls and challenge my opinion the next time there is a debate rather than sneakily trying to be sly about trying be-little me. When you even have an opinion an anything then slate me. This is obviously about you disagreeing with what ive posted on other threads regarding immigration etc, TBH I cant remember you challenging anyone an those threads, you are the worst type of coward , you keep your mouth shut when there is a debate then when someone posts something that has absolute nothing to do with the original debate tries to have a go.

Oh deary me, you really have thrown your toys out of your pram this time, as well as your little quilt! Where to start? Okay, point by point.

Challenge your opinion - in the past I would have done, but I have found over the years that trying to reason with conjecture and unsubstantiated bo11ocks is a futile pursuit. That's why I now rarely comment on the endless prattle found on the threads you are most fond of. The McCann thread began with a comment about unhappiness with media hype and the thread has, in my opinion, merely added to it and, not for the first time, I found your contribution to be the most objectionable.

The comments you have posted on the endless stream of threads about the insidious foreign menace causing havoc in our Anglo-Saxon shangri-la - I read them with increasing despondent sighs and am sometimes moved to murmur a few ancient oaths. It's fair to say I disagree with, or at least am ambivalent to, most of what you say. Now you might think I ought to challenge the things you say, but I've done all that before with others more eloquent and charismatic than you and I think most people who have been here for a few years know where I stand. I will not say anything further for fear of this thread going way off topic as many others have.

Trying to be sly and "be-little" you - hmm, you might have a point. I shall try to be less sly in future although I think the perception of being sly is down to the level of indignation by the reader. It is often difficult to to determine the tone of a written statement as opposed to a verbal one so care should be taken not to jump the gun or, in your case, have a another hissy fit and start accusing people of not debating things properly with you yet again. If someone dismisses what you say, you get indignant. If someone puts a reasoned argument against your misinformed bile, you get indignant. Why bother? Your increasingly hyterical reactions to the obvious wind-ups of the ROTR was... well, increasingly hysterical.

I have never challenged anyone - ha ha! Good one, Baz. Over the years I've clocked up exchanges (often heated) on many subjects from John bloody Curtis to international terrorism to punctuation to booing former players with (in no particular order) Blue Phil, Flopsy, Thenodrog, Abbey, Waggy, the long departed Ade, Cheshire Blue, Adopted Scouser, Revidge Blue and many times with Anti Smiths Euro Fan, as well as a host of chimps like Goal King Cole, Iceland (groans all round) and some arse of a PNE fan who made a nuisance of himself some years back. Moreover, my spats with Bob Fleming (he's not funny in real life, y'know!) have even spilled over into physical violence on many occasions.

The difference between them and you is that they manage to say what they think without making themselves seem like narcissistic clowns who state conjecture as fact and begin laughably misinformed posts with phrase like "I don't want to sound good or important". In short, I don't hold grudges with them and although I often disagree (and sometimes agree) with what they say or believe, I don't feel the need to put the counter argument every time they post something I regard as sh1te. For example, I nearly always disgree with Blue Phil's views on who is to blame for this country going to the dogs, but then I can have a perfectly reasonable discussion with him about books. I often groan at Abbey's observations on life, but I could quite easily imagine having a pint of Guinnes with him while discussing the (non)merits of bloody Kaplinsky. Flopsy often makes me want to give him a clip round the ear while muttering "stupid boy!" but then he'll say something that I almost (almost!) agree with and I realise he's not the stupid boy he used to be. Adopted Scouser will defend the maudlin predisposition of his adopted brethren following another catastrophe causing me to develop a facial tick, but then he'll drop a line from the greatest film ever made into his posts and I'll realise it was done with a nod and wink and I'll know that he's not completely beyond redemption. ASEF drives me mad with his invented hysteria, but then the next time he'll make me laugh and I'll realise he's not the autistic nazi that his posts sometimes suggest he is. No doubt, they disagree with some (many!) things I write, but they don't get all shirty about it and bandying insults about.

With you I have held back, more often than not because I have been beaten to it and someone else has already taken you to task, or out of sheer apathy on my part. I was sorely tempted not to bother replying to this as I am supposed to be getting ready to go out, but figured you deserved a response even if just to show I'm not "the worst type of coward". Incidentally, if you think I am, you really haven't lived.

Maybe I went too far in reacting to the "good and important" nonsense last night but I thought it needed a response. The rest of my post in relation to the McCanns was a response to the thread and media hype in general. For me, I think the saddest part of this tragedy is that a little girl remains missing and the spotlight has gone away from that and has been replaced by thus far scurrilous accusations in relation to her parents.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Oh deary me, you really have thrown your toys out of your pram this time, as well as your little quilt! Where to start? Okay, point by point.

Challenge your opinion - in the past I would have done, but I have found over the years that trying to reason with conjecture and unsubstantiated bo11ocks is a futile pursuit. That's why I now rarely comment on the endless prattle found on the threads you are most fond of. The McCann thread began with a comment about unhappiness with media hype and the thread has, in my opinion, merely added to it and, not for the first time, I found your contribution to be the most objectionable.The comments you have posted on the endless stream of threads about the insidious foreign menace causing havoc in our Anglo-Saxon shangri-la - I read them with increasing despondent sighs and am sometimes moved to murmur a few ancient oaths. It's fair to say I disagree with, or at least am ambivalent to, most of what you say. Now you might think I ought to challenge the things you say, but I've done all that before with others more eloquent and charismatic than you and I think most people who have been here for a few years know where I stand. I will not say anything further for fear of this thread going way off topic as many others have.

Trying to be sly and "be-little" you - hmm, you might have a point. I shall try to be less sly in future although I think the perception of being sly is down to the level of indignation by the reader. It is often difficult to to determine the tone of a written statement as opposed to a verbal one so care should be taken not to jump the gun or, in your case, have a another hissy fit and start accusing people of not debating things properly with you yet again. If someone dismisses what you say, you get indignant. If someone puts a reasoned argument against your misinformed bile, you get indignant. Why bother? Your increasingly hyterical reactions to the obvious wind-ups of the ROTR was... well, increasingly hysterical.

I have never challenged anyone - ha ha! Good one, Baz. Over the years I've clocked up exchanges (often heated) on many subjects from John bloody Curtis to international terrorism to punctuation to booing former players with (in no particular order) Blue Phil, Flopsy, Thenodrog, Abbey, Waggy, the long departed Ade, Cheshire Blue, Adopted Scouser, Revidge Blue and many times with Anti Smiths Euro Fan, as well as a host of chimps like Goal King Cole, Iceland (groans all round) and some arse of a PNE fan who made a nuisance of himself some years back. Moreover, my spats with Bob Fleming (he's not funny in real life, y'know!) have even spilled over into physical violence on many occasions.

The difference between them and you is that they manage to say what they think without making themselves seem like narcissistic clowns who state conjecture as fact and begin laughably misinformed posts with phrase like "I don't want to sound good or important". In short, I don't hold grudges with them and although I often disagree (and sometimes agree) with what they say or believe, I don't feel the need to put the counter argument every time they post something I regard as sh1te. For example, I nearly always disgree with Blue Phil's views on who is to blame for this country going to the dogs, but then I can have a perfectly reasonable discussion with him about books. I often groan at Abbey's observations on life, but I could quite easily imagine having a pint of Guinnes with him while discussing the (non)merits of bloody Kaplinsky. Flopsy often makes me want to give him a clip round the ear while muttering "stupid boy!" but then he'll say something that I almost (almost!) agree with and I realise he's not the stupid boy he used to be. Adopted Scouser will defend the maudlin predisposition of his adopted brethren following another catastrophe causing me to develop a facial tick, but then he'll drop a line from the greatest film ever made into his posts and I'll realise it was done with a nod and wink and I'll know that he's not completely beyond redemption. ASEF drives me mad with his invented hysteria, but then the next time he'll make me laugh and I'll realise he's not the autistic nazi that his posts sometimes suggest he is. No doubt, they disagree with some (many!) things I write, but they don't get all shirty about it and bandying insults about.

With you I have held back, more often than not because I have been beaten to it and someone else has already taken you to task, or out of sheer apathy on my part. I was sorely tempted not to bother replying to this as I am supposed to be getting ready to go out, but figured you deserved a response even if just to show I'm not "the worst type of coward". Incidentally, if you think I am, you really haven't lived.

Maybe I went too far in reacting to the "good and important" nonsense last night but I thought it needed a response. The rest of my post in relation to the McCanns was a response to the thread and media hype in general. For me, I think the saddest part of this tragedy is that a little girl remains missing and the spotlight has gone away from that and has been replaced by thus far scurrilous accusations in relation to her parents.

TBH – Ive never even seen you before on this board, yet you seem to have read a hell of a lot of my posts and seem to have got yourself worked up by them. Why then if you have clearly read so many , have you failed to vent your obvious anger, instead you have chosen a time and thread that is wholly unacceptable.

Again it is postetes such as myself BP, Theno and As who get accused of taking other threads off topic, yet in your post you are discussing my political views . Please explain what my political views have got to do with this thread, I certainly haven’t raised them. As for you- I feel ambushed because I know so little about what your belief system. I would expect this retort from poster such as PhilipL, whom to his credit will debate back in the relevant thread, yet you have decided to start an argument based on my political stance on a thread relating to a missing 4 year old

My post out of the first page was properly the most moderate of all the posts who suspected the McCann’s, indeed if you actually read my post, and then you would amazingly see that I never even suggested that the MCans have done anything malicious to their daughter. Yet you have chosen to set upon it, thus this is the main clue behind the real reason why you chose to pick on my post. The next time make sure you post your venom in the relevant thread

[Ben-2000]

This will be another thread that will be locked before long because of the bickering...again

[Cheeky Sidders]

Im not saying this to make myself look good or important... Personally it seems feasible that as two doctors they have sedated there children, whilst they had dined and either they administered too much to Madeline and she has overdosed... Subsequently the parents and or friends have disposed of the body.

Spazza, I've had a couple but figured you would have tried (bless you) while I was out and having read your latest whining batch of belly-aching I figured I would do you the very great honour of replying, even though it is strictly infra dig. In the above highlighted box I have picked out the particlular sh1te you spouted that got my goat so much. As ever, infantile specious blather and utterly without any foundation. What makes it all the galling is you suggest that they have disposed of Madeleine's body (illegally) after sedating her (illegally) and killing her (illegally) and then claiming "I never even suggested that the MCans have done anything malicious to their daughter" You really are a shameless poltroon. The stuff written by others washed over me, perhaps because none of them had the self-bestowed aggrandizement to add that we should not consider them "good or important". Perhaps they lack your confidence or swagger, but then maybe they are not hubristic popinjays like yourself.

As for the other inane, self-pitying drivel you have added tonight I'll say that I made mention of your "political" (ha!) beliefs because you raised them yourself in your earlier epistle when you were once again casting yourself as the victim of someone trying to stifle your right to free speech. Yawn.

As for the rest, I refuse to argue anything with a knave with cannot use apostrophes properly, nor know the difference between who and whom. Go to the back of the class, Spazzotron, you really are a very silly, little boy.

[dave birch]

Before making any assertions, I would suggest that people read about the death of Azaria Chamberlain at a campsite at Uluru NT.

There are some similarities between the disappearance of both children, the demeanour of the parents, particularly the mother, the quality of the police investigation and the role of the media.

Lindy Chamberlain was originally found guilty and sent to gaol but subsequently found to have been the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice and released. The so-called forensic evidence was proved to be incorrect and many "expert witnesses" were made to look somewhat foolish.

[Cheeky Sidders]

Before making any assertions, I would suggest that people read about the death of Azaria Chamberlain at a campsite at Uluru NT.

There are some similarities between the disappearance of both children, the demeanour of the parents, particularly the mother, the quality of the police investigation and the role of the media.

Lindy Chamberlain was originally found guilty and sent to gaol but subsequently found to have been the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice and released. The so-called forensic evidence was proved to be incorrect and many "expert witnesses" were made to look somewhat foolish.

A fine point well put. I had mentioned the case of the dingo and the baby at work the other day (couldn't remember the child's name which perhaps says something about the way the media report these cases as much as it does about my memory) and how the pendulum of public feeling had swung many ways. First of all there was widespread sympathy for the Chamberlains, then there was muttering about how they were too calm about it and didn't react like grieving parents, then mum went on trial, was convicted on very dodgy evidence and then won her appeal. Worst of all, Meryl Streep played her in the film! In short it was trial by media largely based on the public's shifting feeling towards Lindy Chamberlain. Like Kate McCann, she was a religious woman and did not act as the public thought she should, ie. wailing and weeping, and her personality jarred with many people who were only too quick to point the finger.

[SouthAussieRover]

Spazza, I've had a couple but figured you would have tried (bless you) while I was out and having read your latest whining batch of belly-aching I figured I would do you the very great honour of replying, even though it is strictly infra dig. In the above highlighted box I have picked out the particlular sh1te you spouted that got my goat so much. As ever, infantile specious blather and utterly without any foundation. What makes it all the galling is you suggest that they have disposed of Madeleine's body (illegally) after sedating her (illegally) and killing her (illegally) and then claiming "I never even suggested that the MCans have done anything malicious to their daughter" You really are a shameless poltroon. The stuff written by others washed over me, perhaps because none of them had the self-bestowed aggrandizement to add that we should not consider them "good or important". Perhaps they lack your confidence or swagger, but then maybe they are not hubristic popinjays like yourself.

As for the other inane, self-pitying drivel you have added tonight I'll say that I made mention of your "political" (ha!) beliefs because you raised them yourself in your earlier epistle when you were once again casting yourself as the victim of someone trying to stifle your right to free speech. Yawn.

As for the rest, I refuse to argue anything with a knave with cannot use apostrophes properly, nor know the difference between who and whom. Go to the back of the class, Spazzotron, you really are a very silly, little boy.

You only had a couple?

I can't really see that they have done something to their own daughter. If it turns out they have then one would have to say they are skilled actors.

[cletus]

They don't seem to give any emotion when they give their 'statements' everything is written down in a structured way.Surely you'd be visably upset and frantic to find out where your little girl has gone.

All i see is the look of a mother who is almost traumatised by the whole thing....

Her child has disappeared, she`s living with the guilt of leaving the children alone (the entire world has slammed them for that...& rightly so) The press are making stories/theories up for fun & are camped on their doorsteps 24/7. The Portugese police don`t seem to know their arses from their elbows. They`ve got two other young children to care for/keep entertained/shield from all this & try to keep a normal a life as possible.

So far the media have accused the parents of....

Drugging the children

Being swingers

burrying (sp?) Maddy under a road

burrying Maddy under a church

dumping Maddy in the sea

He not being the real father (what that has to do with it i don`t know?)

carrying a 25days dead body around in a hire car (with the worlds media in tow)

involving rich friends with a yaught (sp?) to help dispose of the body at sea.

...what will they come up with next to try to discredit them?

[herbergeehh]

The whole thing is a disgrace, and I hope - when the truth comes out - they can file a lawsuit against these papers for dragging their names into the worst mud imaginable.

[Flopsy]

They're actually Muslims?

[cletus]

They're actually Muslims?

Well why didn`t anybody say so before now?

They deserve all they get!

[Damage]

I cant believe the hypocracy!

Mods close subjects because taboos are mentioned and here we are ............... a totally irrelevant mention of a taboo subject!

There was a topic closed on ICBINF recently for no reason other than the mod was feeling a bit miffed.

Here we have another mod taking the mickey!

Pathetic! Hypocritical!

"Four legs good ..................."

[Flopsy]

Oh please, you're getting worked up about someone using a throw away comment with the word Muslim but not whether or not the McCanns are either 1) Being crucified unfairly in the press, or 2) Guilty as charged and killed their child?

No its about a thread being closed.

[Damage]

Oh please, you're getting worked up about someone using a throw away comment with the word Muslim but not whether or not the McCanns are either 1) Being crucified unfairly in the press, or 2) Guilty as charged and killed their child?

No its about a thread being closed.

I am getting worked up by the hypocracy of people who use the excuse of the taboo words - immigration and muslim - to close threads but then use the very same words to ridicule the political immaturity of other persons. Please dont accuse me of getting wound up and focussing on the wrong things in this thread. It was YOU who made the facetious comment about "muslims" on this thread in order to score an extremely petty point!. I was merely pointing out that other threads have been closed by "you" (i.e. moderators) for raising these taboo issues - but it is OK for you because you have right on your side! A very clear example of 4legs/2legs political arrogance.

[Flopsy]

I was replying to Cletus' question

...what will they come up with next to try to discredit them?

at no point was it an invitation for a debate on the rights or wrongs of immigration, religion or anything, more a comment on the viciousness and over topness of our beloved Media. You're the one dragging it back to free speach, immigration issues, the mods have it in for you. (they dont) and SteB closed your thread and answered your points directly.

Now, back to the topic. Did the McCanns kill/get invovled with the disapearance of their daughter?

Me, because I'm cynical untrusting git would say yes, on nothing more than a gut feeling about the whole case not feeling right.

Still, if they did do it they appear to be awfully good at disposing of bodies and I'm hopefully wrong, especially considering Portugal's police forces' reputation on these matters.

[dave birch]

I was replying to Cletus' question

at no point was it an invitation for a debate on the rights or wrongs of immigration, religion or anything, more a comment on the viciousness and over topness of our beloved Media. You're the one dragging it back to free speach, immigration issues, the mods have it in for you. (they dont) and SteB closed your thread and answered your points directly.

Now, back to the topic. Did the McCanns kill/get invovled with the disapearance of their daughter?

Me, because I'm cynical untrusting git would say yes, on nothing more than a gut feeling about the whole case not feeling right.

Still, if they did do it they appear to be awfully good at disposing of bodies and I'm hopefully wrong, especially considering Portugal's police forces' reputation on these matters.

1, it's "speech", not speach

2, I hope that you're never called up as a juror. Relying on "gut feeling" rather than proven evidence is something that beggars belief. In an earlier post I mentioned the Azaria Chamberlain case. The attitude that you just expressed consigned an innocent person to spend a few years behind bars before she was "proven" to be innocent.