@johnboy25 wrote:

Maybe that’s what the new evidence is – all this talk about DNA could be a diversion.

A diversion? So youre saying it was really a motorbike they found in the boot then and not hair? :shock:

I’ve been expecting that charge to be brought each time they claim to be or intimate theyre caring considerate doting parents actually :lol: :lol: :lol:

@forumhostpb wrote:

@Bad Manners wrote:

I didnt say any of you have accused them of murdering their Daughter.

Bat said “Mrs Mc Cann got extremely agitated, and nearly hysterical, and refused to answer questions”. (From the Police)

I repled “I think most people would be agitated when they’ve just been accused of murdering their Daughter”.

Ok what I meant to say was that most people would be agitated when theyve just been accused of accidently killing their Daughter (by the Police).

Slip of the tongue.

Fair enough.

I agree with you that most people would be pretty agitated with this exception. The McCanns have spent their every waking minute in promoting the cause of the hunt for Maddie in the Media.

Given my belief (and not yours) that they were complicit …. i reckon that they would get even more agitated as they more than anybody would know that this entire thing was a farrago of lies.

A common reaction to suspicion when trying to hide a lie is to massively overreact due to the subconcious belief that such an overreaction will convince somepeople of the lie and will make others feel too uncomfortable about pursuing the line of enquiry

Discerning however whether a reaction is an “over”reaction tho is the hard part, but with people normally pretty icecold and seemingly emotionless almost any “reaction” would or could be seen as suspicious whether it is or not

@krazykristie wrote:

I await the trial with baited breath, a supply of cheese sandwiches and one eye on Max Clifford to see if he offers them a *deal* to tell their side of the story. Cynical? Of course I am. But who am I to pour scorn on two loving parents that left their children in an apartment alone. I was interested to see a comment made from one of the parents saying it was no different than sitting in the garden. If you were at home in the garden one would presume that one had a baby monitor so that one could hear ones children. Still, between the Portguese Hillbilly Police Dept and the worlds media, one thing is for sure. They will be tried, sentenced and hung before ever entering a court to defend themselves.

I think this still comes back to the fact that had their child simply wandered in the road and been run over there wouldnt have been such a swell of misguided sympathy, they would clearly have been seen to have caused their childs death and much fewer people would be brainwashed to shower them with empathy and ignore the fact that they quite blatantly caused their childs death even if they didnt do it themselves

But because she was allegedly taken rather than run over they are quite likely to get off scot free, and to that extent of complicity they ARE without any shadow of a doubt guilty before entering a courtroom, any greater degree of guilt or complicity is still indeterminate but what is already quite blatant is more than enough to justify a total lack of compassion for either of them IMO as their guilt and complicity is beyond question as by their own confession we KNOW they for no justifiable reason left three toddlers completely alone and unsupervised in an unlocked apartment in a foriegn country

@fastcars wrote:

@johnboy25 wrote:

See?! You got away with it!! Do I have to get myself a boob job before I can express myself however I want on the boards?!

I wasn’t calling anyone sweetie (that’s what it was changed to last time so I’ll save them the trouble) It was on the subject of the BB8 final and whether or not anyone else heard Charlie say that to Chanelle before she sat back down after milking her few seconds of camera time.

It’s not a term I would ever use to anyone, I’m a true gentleman.

That and the fact it’s too tame for me. I prefer the ones with four letters.

To express yourself properly all you need is a brain.

But wouldnt such requirements be a case of racial discrimination against the scotts and irish tho? :lol:

@r.O.T.T wrote:

@forumhostpb wrote:

@r.O.T.T wrote:

not hard to work out anita is PB

That will come as something of a surprise to our long time user – the infamous Throb.

For the record and since R.O.T.T. (aka Dagger) has seen fit to raise this disgusting picture.after all traces of it have been deleted….his first PM to me said – and I quote “You’re a coward and a shit”…. just that and nothing else.

This was followed by more abusive PM’s.

By contrast, the several other users that also PM’d me about the unacceptable picture (and attached comments) made the point that they felt it was disgusting and that I deleted it. I entirely agree with them and told them all so individually.

The picture WAS deleted within moments of my signing in and so also were the posts that referred to it or worse still quoted it so that it appeared yet again.

i called you a coward and a sh it because you only deleted all traces of ubers paedophile comments. i asked for the post to be locked you wouldnt lock it with the evidence of ubers paedophile comments.
For that i call you a coward and a sh it

PMSL @ “paedophile comments” and the award for the furthest stretching of the realms of reality goes too,,,,,,,drum roll,,,,,,,ROTT

Get a grip lol

Had the photo been of a 21 year old I am sure many people would have had the same thought of what it “looked like”, and although many would be socially pussy whipped into never vocalising it would, as it wouldnt look any different have thought the same thing here

Had in the photo she looked tall, muddy, sleepy or anything else would that also be a “paedo” comment then purely because its a direct observation of a photo of a child?

Jeez, talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel for a dig lol

And actually PB you didnt even come close (can I say that? :shock: ) to getting rid of all traces of it, firstly isnt this thread a “trace”? And secondly the actual “soooooo offensive pic” is the one quite plainly shown at the end of bats link on her earlier post on the same thread, a link that is also re shown several times as that post is then quoted so out of curiosity how is the actual pic itself, if so disgusting so much worse than a link to the exact same photo on the exact same thread?

Not critcising or complaining about the deletion itself here you understand, as being no more than a satirical poke at the critiques of and exampled of “wild speculating” on the topic its an irrelevance anyhoo (albeit IMO obviously a funny irrelevance)

But merely picking up on the photo being described as “disgusting” when I am sure sky would beg to differ, when infact it was the comedic “wild speculation” people had an issue with, even tho the exact same suggestion of a possibility has been posted several times on the topic without such an outcry

But add a publicly (on the world wide media) displayed photo to a far less serious comment and its somehow “more”

Its been removed? :o :o

Oh well, that’ll teach me to download pics from disreputeable sites like Skynews.com I guess :lol:

@anita Gofradump wrote:

Im so bored of hearing about them, that i’m really not botherd if there innocent or guilty anymore.
They should be charged with crimes against the state for boring everyone to death with this crap.
But saying that we know doctors have a history of killing people, harold shipman rings a bell, he should of quit being a doctor before he was found and taken up boxing…he had a lethal jab.

PMSL @ “lethal jab”

On a serious note tho, psychologically its an observed and known fact that with certain areas of the medical profession as with certain jobs in the military and other social lines of work they tend to either attract or create a type of actual or social sociopath as that type of mindset is the only one that can repeatedly be around death and the dying repeatedly without suffering breakdown, it causes a form of constant post trauma which over time becomes permanent one of the aspects of which is a numbness and neutrality to the concept and actuality of death and the occurence and even causeality of it as many doctors will within the onset of their everyday work have frequent occassion where they have to decide by the merit of limited time and resources to choose to let people die where an unlimited amount of time and resources would have meant they could have lived

Basic decision making and choosing the better and most likely to survive which overtime becimes as ordinary a decision as deciding who should get the last fishfinger at dinnertime

Aside from the shipman case there have been many unsubstantially proveable cases where people have been accused of causing by design the death of patients where its thought they disagreed with their lifestyle in one way or another or saw them as a severe drain on NHS resources that could be more effectively used to save several peoples lives rather than that one individuals life which without admission would be almost impossible to prove but also which have in several instances resulted in the redistribution of the entire staff at some cancer wards and ICU’s just incase the team has become overly laced with staff who take a dim personal view of such things as heavy smokers or drinkers to limit the chances of a case that would be proveable

So such things arent either as impossible nor as mythical as some suspected urban myths on the one hand, but on the other could also simply be an explaination for the Mcanns seemingly detached demeanour. A point I had sorta been curious if anyone else would have pieced together from my previous mentionings of sociopathic psychological mindsets but that it seems nobody has, or at least hasnt vocalised unless I missed it

As for boring a nation to near death, the world might be more acurate I would imagine from what I have seen on other sites with threads like this so perhaps attempted genocide might be a charge that could be brought if all others fall by the wayside lol :lol: :lol:

@rubyred wrote:

(chuckle) oh years and years ago noo,,,I was in blackpool with my Mum n Dad and my then,,best pal. we met 2 laddies that lived in a caravan with their uncle..

few month later was the Black Panther case.( donald neilsen) ..and he fitted the ID of “uncle Andre” ..

we went to the headmistress of Rockie and all of a sudden the school was full of C.I.D ..

a small comment made me sherlock ( feckin ) holmes.

it was NOT uncle Andre,,but funnily and quite spookily enough,,it was his cousin ! apparently “andre” knew of it all..i got a bad vibe (maaaaaaan)

the moral being,,,,TRUST yer instincts !

In pretty much every instance there will be people whos instincts are the complete opposite to the people who by chance turn out to be right

Instincts are far from infallible, and as much as they draw on subconcious awarenesses the conscious mind cant tap into they are also massively affected by transient enviromental factors, mood, outlook and general disposition

So at best they are only ever worthy of being a starting point and not a conclusion

But their acuracy is also vastly overstated as people tend to conveniently forget the times their instincts are wrong and in many cases will actively avoid anything that might show their instincts are wrong to maintain that delusion

[Author]

Posts