Sue

The Crying Game - Dave Berry

I'm unable to make a post in the lounge. Just testing whether this will post. ETA: It did, and whatever was going on seems to be OK now - thanks for your help Sean.

I'm leaving this now and going off to have a lovely Christmas. To all of you - have a lovely Christmas too. xx

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Despite all the cr@p, I'm finding this thread > quite interesting in two respects. > > Firstly, I'm really trying to understand the > motivation for starting it; xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I've explained in my OP and then in quite a detailed response to Bellenden Belle (I think) why I started it. Not trying to be rude, but what is it that you don't understand in those posts? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Secondly, the idea that the McCanns are > responsible even if their child was abducted by a > stranger, because of their 'reckless' behaviour, > seems to me very representative of a certain > strand of current thinking i.e. that the failure > to prevent harm occuring (even where the risk is > very remote) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The risk of abduction was extremely remote, yes. The risk of vomiting, choking, falling or wandering out of an unlocked apartment was rather higher, I should say, wouldn't you? Not to mention the emotional distress caused on waking up, calling or crying for their parents, and finding themselves - by themselves. That's why most parents don't leave their little children alone. Isn't it? But I've already pointed this out on the thread, so no doubt will be accused of repetition and going round in circles.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don?t think people are attacking Sue for having an unpopular view (for what it?s worth at a basic level, she thinks something is fishy in the whole business and so do I, if pushed. Really hard.) DJKQ might be doing her usual dog-with?bone thing and being OTT with Sue (makes me wonder if there is history there between them?) ? I?ve been there and have some sympathy with Sue on that level xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sorry I missed this bit out when I posted, have edited it. The only history I am aware of between DJKQ and myself is that she appeared to be doing her best to have our folk events at DHFC closed down because the club had thought they had a late licence when in fact they hadn't (they now have). She made some rather nasty personal remarks to me at the time which she then edited out. She has today sent me a PM, the contents of which are frankly risible. I must admit I was slightly tempted to post it on here, but as it's a PM I will respect that. Also I do not want to get dragged into other people's games. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > But in general terms people have tried to point > out it?s a bit creepy to have THIS level of > interest on a topic. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Is it? I once shared an office with a guy who had a whole room in his house devoted to his collection of pictures of buses. Now that is creepy! Who can say why one becomes interested in something? FWIW, my family also agrees my interest in this case is a bit over the top :), but I do feel strongly about it for reasons I've already stated. Also, when I first started following the case, I became interested partly because it was like a real-life detective story, and partly, ironically enough, because I was interested in the various aspects of human nature displayed on the forums discussing it. And also because - as I have said - I became aware for probably the first time in my life (how naive is that) of the distorted information peddled by the press. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To say she was "set upon" is > innacurate and over-emotive. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I didn't feel I was "set upon", however I did feel a lot of people were behaving in a rather childish knee-jerk way instead of addressing the substantive points. I don't necessarily exclude myself but I did try (and possibly failed) not to descend to the personal insult level. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > It?s one case in many many many. It made the > headlines for some of the reasons outlined. To > have SUCH an interst in it so many years later? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx It has been kept constantly in the news by the parents themselves and by their "spokesman". The wikileak was also only very recently publicised, as was the overturning on appeal of the ban on the publication of Sr Amaral's book in Portugal. Though the UK press were noticeably less quick to report that then they were to report on the original ban. In fact I'm not sure it's actually been reported at all in this country. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > And by such an interest don?t just mean on a > personal level ? I mean to the point of getting > all upset when people suggest it might be a bit > much > That is what people are struggling with here xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Where have I got "all upset"? I thought some of the comments were downright offensive and one bordered on obscene, but fair enough, it's a forum and if I post on it I accept that some people are not going to be able to debate in an adult and reasoned way. I did get upset though when a comment was posting saying that I had said something absolutely vile which I hadn't said, and then the person in question refused to remove the comment. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Also by using your logic any nitwit could express > profoundly ?unpopular? views (and you can image > some of the ones that would set you off, right?) > and you would expect the general readership to be > passive? I don?t think so xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx There's a difference between debating the subject matter itself and putting forward a different viewpoint in a reasoned way, and being personally offensive. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > So a woman courted publicity by going public with > her views, seeking like minded support, and was > shocked to find that not everyone agrees with her, > and with some people taking against her? > > Now does that sound like anyone else involved in > this whole sorry business?? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx As I've tried to explain, it is not the fact that people disagree, it is the fact that they are not disagreeing on questions of fact, but disagreeing about the fact that I have posted at all.

louisiana Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In what way are you putting your head above the > parapet? You are not involved in the case in any > shape or form. > xxxxxxxxx Because as amply demonstrated by some of the responses to this thread, I am saying things which a lot of people (it would appear) would prefer not to be said, so are shooting me down for it. It would make for an easier life if I didn't do that.

Dougal Mulldoon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well I hope I have convinced you, because there > are lots of websites and indeed blogs so it must > be true. I don?t know about reality but it?s true > for me. > xxxxxxxxxx That's very funny Dougal, but turning to the point you are evidently trying to make, can you point me to the official police files about it, because I don't trust information on websites and blogs unless it derives directly from official documents. ETA: Or things which it can be directly demonstrated that people have said, ie that is in video footage, rather than reported - possibly wrongly - by the press.

TillieTrotter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hurrah....she still manages to have the last word! xxxxx First she claims she never made the statement - then she tells me where it is. Amazing! In a post on Tuesday night she writes what she claims will be her final words. Thursday morning, and she's still posting. Amazing!

pommie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > yep salvation army are always collecting and i > have been collecting on their behalf so if you > have anything you would like to donate then please > let me know xxxxxx Pommie, respect, I don't have anything to give this year but please let me know for next year. I have a lot of time fot the Sally Army, and my OH used to play tambour in it - all his rellies were members (sorry if that's not the correct term)

wildlife+punk Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > it was a really difficult and shocking programme > to watch the thing is without farms and farmers > there will fewer people to look after the > countryside xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Yes, and noone seems to realise that xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx , the farmers are going out of business > at an alarming rate because the supermarkets want > everything at such cheap prices and as the > "product" in the case of milk, eggs etc are > perishable they have to accept stupid prices which > then means they cant pay off debts and go out of > business. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx People want things as cheap as possible - that's human nature, I do it myself. And we don't think of the consequences, or aren't aware of them xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > lf only more people had bought direct from farms > instead of thinking cheap is better then maybe > there would be more farms in business, this will > all have a detrimental effect on our countryside > and wildlife, but hey what does the government > care at least the milk, eggs and meat will be > cheap, tasteless but cheap. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Totally agree xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > strange thing was the dairy farmer who was on the > programme who had just gone out of business, was > flown over to america to see these cow prisons, > and stood there looking up at floor after floor of > hundreds of cows standing like zombies with > nowhere to lie down and said how happy they > looked??? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx It's all a sick joke, isn't it

wildlife+punk Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > l am also disgusted and sickened at the prospect > of these battery prison ideas for cows and pigs > like they have in america, for any of those who > didnt see the panorama special tonight there are > plans to open an enormous dairy prison where all > cows will be kept in large airplane style hangers > 24/7 stacked together in many floors with barely > room to lie down, they wont get to go outside at all in > their lives and will be given antibiotics to > counterbalance their lack of sunlight and grass, > there are also plans to have a similar type thing > with pigs who are pumped into full grown size > within 5months as opposed to the normal 2-3years. > > lts a scarey thought that soon there will be no > more animals grazing in fields and no more farms > all to make milk or meat that few pence cheaper, > but what will be the after effects of all this > meddleing with nature, lm so glad l dont eat meat > we are going backwards in our treatments of > animals not forwards. xxxxxxxx That is really revolting. I eat meat occasionally, but so far as I have control over it, only free range meat. I used to live on an organic farm and the animals had a great life - until they went off to be slaughtered (sorry, that's not supposed to be funny) - but the fact is, if people didn't eat meat, sheep cows pigs etc would not be part of our countryside at all. The farmers took such enormous care of their animals, and used natural remedies wherever possible.

louisiana Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > There are other kids that have disappeared in not > dissimilar circumstances, but have had almost zero > press coverage, or the peculiar honour of forums > devoted to them. Perhaps because their parents > were not middle class doctors (for example, Ben > Needham case). > xxxxxxxx Perhaps this could have been because their parents didn't employ a salaried "spokesman" to arrange their PR for them?

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Ok, now im scared xxxxxxx I'm beginning to feel like I'm in a kids' playground on this forum. Play your games if you want to, but the fact is that a little girl has been missing for three years, and slagging me off doesn't alter either that fact or any of the facts which I have posted on this thread. I'm absolutely gobsmacked at some of the posts on here, tbh. If you don't want to debate the substantive issues, but prefer to have a go at me, why not start an anti-Sue thread somewhere and leave this thread to those who want to read it. I have never been scared of putting my head above the parapet, and many of the responses on this thread demonstrate all too well to me why most people are. Human nature, eh. Never ceases to amaze me. ETA: Sorry admin, this post crossed with yours

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You are some piece of work Sue....really you are. > xxxxxxxxxxxx Well, that's a very constructive comment.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I'm not removing any statements. > xxxxxxxx And that was your response to my request. So, as in so much of what you have said on this thread, you are wrong.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DJKillaQueen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > (having already decided they killed their > > own child and covered it up). > > > I have never said that, please read my posts and > remove this statement. > xxxxxxxx You appear to have now removed it, or someone has, but your unedited statement remains on the thread in my response to it above.

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > Indeed Narnia but I would say there are other > factors at play here > > 1) This particular thread makes a lot of people > uneasy. Argue all you like, it does. The sooner it > disappears the better xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Is this not just your personal opinion? Do you know what everybody who is reading the thread but not posting is thinking? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 2) It's upsetting not just for the readers but the > main participants, including the OP, appear to be > getting ever more agitated - to what end? Noone is > going to prove anything here, but the agitation > will continue. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Again, how do you know readers are upset, apart from those who have posted? My "agitation" (though I would term it frustration) was solely due to one other poster who persisted in posting material which a) made it clear she hadn't properly read my posts and b) just kept repeating the same stuff over and over again even when I had answered her points previously. How do you know the agitation will continue? Why is it necessary to prove something? Isn't a forum supposed to be for debate? I have stated why I started the thread, and it wasn't to prove anything. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 3) From a forum perspective, the prospect of > someone saying something libellous on this thread > is higher than usual - again for all pain and no > gain xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Yes and that is why I have tried to be very careful in how I have phrased my posts, and have also tried to stick to information which is in the public domain via the police files, rather than to information from other sources. I would say that the main libel here is in DJKQ stating that I had said that the McCanns killed their daughter, when I have said nothing of the kind. She has refused to remove this statement, as you can see in her posts. I have asked admin to remove it but have had no reply.

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The thread spans five months and kind of > chronicles all the developments at the time. You > might find some of the comments of > interest....maybe. xxxxxxxx I doubt it. I was a member of forums devoted solely to the McCann case at the time. I've got no interest in reading or rehashing old stuff. I'm solely interested in what is known at the moment.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I've never been a fan of the Pogues since arsehole > sang with Van Morrison and changed the lyrics of > G.L.O.R.I.A xxxxxxxxx I didn't know that! What did he change them to?

Oh well if it's from 2007 I won't bother looking. Virtually everything about the case was speculation until the police conclusion and files were made public (or the parts of them that the police made public, anyway).

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The McCann debate has been had before in here. > For more than 5 fekkin pages too > xxxxxxxx Where? If I'd known that I wouldn't have started a new thread. I just did a search on McCann, but all that came up was the thread about young kids cycling to school by themselves, in which a comparison was made to this case. Is that what you mean?

katie1997 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Exactly the point I was trying to make earlier > Sue... xxxxxx Sorry, what is? ETA: Sorry Katie, I posted this before you edited your post above, ignore this post!

Fair enough Sean, but if you look through the sequence of posts, you will see that almost all my posts have been in response to points made by other people. If I don't reply it looks as if I am agreeing with them. :-S ETA: and if the organisations you mention say the same thing, and the press is withholding factual information (you surely aren't comparing this to David Icke's lizard theory?), then isn't that a bit worrying, regardless of who the organisations are?

Chick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sue you are sick and need professional help. > Please drop this thread. xxxxxxx Eh? What in your opinion is the evidence a) that I am sick and b) that I need professional help? Why should I drop the thread just because you don't like it? What is wrong with disseminating information which is already in the public domain but which the British press is on the whole ignoring? ETA: I have explained above why I started the thread. Please read the post. How does that make me sick?

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Grow up ffs....JC.....(and stupid smiley at the > end)....... xxxxxxx Why exactly are you continuing with this, DJKQ? I have explained above why I started the thread. Now you have descended to personal insults.