[ubermik]

Ahhh so this is like brown nose disease then except that its b”rimming” over with tongue-ocity :lol:

[ubermik]

@~Pebbles~ wrote:

Silly moos

Uber are you feeling ok? thats the shortest response ive ever seen you type :wink: :lol:[/quote]

And yet its alleged that the size of the “post” isnt important :lol: :lol: :wink:

[ubermik]

@~Pebbles~ wrote:

What peed me off about this was that they killed the animal with this illness knowing that it cant be passed from animal to animal and that infected animals can recover and become immune :evil:

Silly moos

[ubermik]

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

As for the lie detector, theyre both trained doctors, they will already not only know the fallibility of them, but which drugs aid a pass, which are easily detectable and which arent and what defence to wheel out even if the test is positive, and thats why, if they have, I reckon they have suggested a test to try and dissipate some of the disbelievers back here in the UK

Or maybe they could just sit and tell the truth.

I’d already said they could also confess :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[ubermik]

@rubyred wrote:

dammed IF they Do and Dammed if they DONT !

huh ?

Nah, I think the only damnation likely here is their own personal one if they did kill her in some way

If all they did was leave her alone they dont seem to feel any genuine guilt over that and if the DNA was that damning they would already be in custody

So I reckon even if they did kill her either accidentally or deliberately I think it is unlikely to be proven

As for the lie detector, theyre both trained doctors, they will already not only know the fallibility of them, but which drugs aid a pass, which are easily detectable and which arent and what defence to wheel out even if the test is positive, and thats why, if they have, I reckon they have suggested a test to try and dissipate some of the disbelievers back here in the UK

I’d also guess its most probably been sparked by comments, views and sentiments expressed by people they know or family members since they’ve returned and possibly the new spin doctor

So its a weighed and considered strategic move IMO

Whether guilty or not they have in my opinion been “playing” the public and the media from day one, and have so far only faulted in the outcome changing from them winning before anyone but some of us members of the public suspecting them to it seeming like a stalemate (draw) being the most likely outcome since more realism has been adopted by the media and police

So nah, not “damned” either way as yet and wont be unless one of them cracks or some new evidence is found

And even then all they have to do is both protest their innocence and each blame the other (something else I reckon they have already figured out and prepared for should it all go tits up) because where it cant be discerned which of the two is guilty even if its KNOWN one of them did, niether can be jailed

So short of a confession by both, a confession by one giving incontrivertible proof of the others guilt or indisputeable evidence against one of both none of which I think is likely

they WILL get get away scot free even if they are both guilty I reckon

[ubermik]

And lie detectors arent that reliable

Nervous people regularly cause false positives as do those hiding something other than whats being sought, and people who lack conscience or guilt or who are convinced they are convincing liars can easily pass them as they work due to the change in resistance caused by stress, which isnt present in people who dont feel in anyway stressed about what they HAVE done, and is there in abundance in people who are overly stressed about being found guilty of something they havent done

So no, they arent anywhere near the “science” they are sold as being, but their biggest use is as leverage in that a confession goes down better than being proven to be guilty

So their main use is to pursuade someone who thinks it will “prove” their guilt to confess to get a lower sentence

[ubermik]

@~Pebbles~ wrote:

So theyve offered to take a lie detector test….I wouldnt bother if I were them. Even when it shows that they are telling the truth about not being involved in Madelaines disappearance, people still wont leave it there. Next it will be …the lie detector test was fixed, its not reliable blah blah blah

As for people calling for them to make a public announcement admiting their negligence, why the hell should they?? Its blatantly obvious they know it was wrong to leave the children alone, dont you think if they could turn back the clock they would? Its done now, they cant reverse whats happened, why dont people just concentrate on helping them to find maddie instead of persuing this spiteful attack on them?

LOL, help how? Most people have more than enough to do getting on with their own lives, not worshipping the Mcanns doesnt “hinder” their search the same as people believing every half assed comment or feigning of regret they utter doesnt “help” find her

The majority of the people on the planet have nothing whatsoever to do with whether she will or wont be found and claiming otherwise is totally ludicrous

As for “why the hell should they”, well if they were to do it because people thought they should it would be meaningless, they “should” because its a natural reaction considering what they did, a normal and understandable realisation of the end result of their actions, its nothing more than stating the obvious, accepting responsibility for their decisions and nothing more or less

Not doing so out of actual genuine realisation simply supports the fact they cant see anything majorly wrong with what they did, and to any even barely adequately average parent will be abhorrent that they can be so dismissive about leaving their kids alone

Which in turn quite validly raises the question of “if they can be so impassive about that, what else can they be capable of?”

lets suppose someone stole a tenner out of your house and seemed totally without guilt over it and any apology they offered sounded empty and without any level of sincerity, then lets suppose your house was also burgled

How hard would it be to believe them when they said they hadnt also burgled the house?

Easier or harder to what it would have been had the apology over the tenner been one clearly remorseful, genuine, emotive and sincere?

[ubermik]

@bat wrote:

There is a special report on Sunday night to discuss all these theories. I suspect what it really is, is a desperate attempt by Mr cheesy PR man to offer perfectly reasonable explanations for everything and try and divert attention away from the annointed ones, back to finding maddie. Anyone know how much Mr chessy PR man is getting paid for all this or is he doing it all for free out of the kindness of his heart. Maybe their newfound pal Richard Branson is coughing up the cash. Before you know it the great sainted ones will be attending celebrity “bashes” at his place. :roll: :roll:

Well whether they are guilty or not attention SHOULD be diverted back to finding maddy tho

But just not at the exclusion of the parents or anyone else, a search is a search and NO rock should be left unturned and no person spared suspicion on the mere basis of some missguided and innacurate social ideals of “parents”

But the public at large ARENT searching for maddy, thats the job and function of the police, so no amount of theorising and speculating by the public will in any real sense hinder the search and to claim it will is an act of illogical desperation on their part

And even the police WILL be quite capable of searching AND theorising, its not like the two are mutually exclusive and a person is only capable of doing one or the other lol

[ubermik]

@cas wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@cas wrote:

I personally don’t think a ”perfect” as you put it, parent, exists.

As parents, we do our best…..I personally work in the licenced trade, i’m a Manager for a branch of Threshers. I see plenty parents coming in there, buying alchohol, I sell it to them, doesn’t make them bad parents, doesn’t make me a bad parent because I like to have a drink.

But Uber………….if it came to a choice of putting a meal on the table, or buying a bottle of alchohol, it would definately be a meal on the table,,,,,I can’t say the same thing for some of the customers who come into the shop. Who, having bought their alchohol and cigarettes, scream expletives at the child when it has the audacity to ask for a bag of crisps or a packet of sweets, with the words, ”I aint got the money for sweets!!!!!”

I have on many occassions given the child the sweets or crisps. So whether you like it or not, Sweet does have a very valid point.

But isnt that the exact same point I made?

That most people who are clinically classed as alcoholics arent drunken bums who never have food in for their kids? Look up the definition of an alcoholic, its simply someone who HAS to have a drink, cant do without it. Many of them have well paid jobs and can quite capably manage both and are often not even thought of as having a “problem” by anyone who knows them

But it CAN still have an adverse effect on their kids many years down the road as can many quite ordinary occurences in a household which are far LESS obvious than the likely negatives from growing up in a gay single sex parenting enviroment

The point I was making there is nobody bats an eyelid at theorising the possible harm any factor in a straight household might have, but try to get people to do the EXACT SAME thing where gay people are concerned and the “oooh you homophobe”, “your a gay basher” or “are you secretly gay” nonsense is wheeled out because people in general have been brainwashed into feeling its “wrong” to discuss or examine aspects of gay peoples lives that wouldnt be given a second thought if being done to straight people which is usually quite clearly shown when I wheel threads like this out for the first time on a message board as its a good one for seeing the thought behind peoples views

I wasn’t accusing you of anything Uber, just asking the question.

While your theorising tho, that many people who might have a drug or alchohol problem but who also hold down well paid jobs and look after their kids. There are also those who don’t. Those who do have drug/alchohol problems, bang out kids by the dozen because theyre too ”out of it” to think about contraceptive, much less use it. Children which are paid for out of the benefits office, ultimately the tax payer, the parent continuing their choice of lifestyle, ie., drugs/alchohol, instead of using the money given them to care for their children properly. So,,,,,thats where Sweet, does have a very valid point, you can dress it up all you like, with the so called, responsible drug/alchohol users, there are plenty who don’t give a sh it about anyone or anything when it comes to the next fix, and will!! neglect their children and sell their own mothers. If you think that’s wrong, then I think you must be living on another planet!

But unless ONLY the sort of benefit funded child hoarding absolutely “out of it” type of alcoholic or drug user exists then her statement as it WAS an all encompassing one isnt valid

Whereas if you check mine you will see words like “many” and “some” as no statement concerning any social group is all encompassing, the media just wants people to think that it is

Infact the examples many take as being the majorative norm are infact in most cases usually just a minority, but a minority used to great effect by the government and media to create a desired public opinion and assumption

As for the cost of these beer swilling, drug taking benefit scum, 1) They would get the same money even if they were drug free and tea total and 2) the entire cost for them, and infact the entire benefit system is, with PFI’s (public finance initiatives) being one of the worst offenders having created many millionaires and turned many existing ones into multimillionaires with tax payers money and making public services and buildings cost as much as 5 times what they should have cost and yet no or very little attention either publicly or by the media is paid to them VERY coincidentally lol

And yet where is the drive to sort out internal government wastage and practices? Well that wont happen as long as the majority can be made to shift from one group of “baddies” to another endlessly blaming them for the shortfall in publicly available money

Get any issue of private eye (literally ANY issue) and a piece of paper and add up the amount of money wasted on frivolity by central government and local government and you will see that the bulk of money the government doesnt have isnt because of the ageing population, the unemployed, single parents or any of those things as much as they try to convince the unquestioning sheep minded majority of the fact, its wasted by them and is compounded further by their private business dealings which financially protect their future at the expense of everyone elses

And even putting that aside, I would rather see a million quid given in benefits to an indigenous single mother with a drink and drug problem whose extended family and forebears have all or many of whom HAVE paid into the system than a hundred quid being given to some benefits tourist who turns up on a plane, boat or train ready to drop her sprog in the softest healthcare and benefits nation on earth

[ubermik]

Maybe its a typo, maybe what was actually said is that they used it as a “dump her” truck :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Author]

Posts