Dr Amaral's Defence Funds

costello wrote:

Andrew wrote:Cheers. Well no doubt she will make a comment on this deliberate lie in due course.

Nina on CMoMM has just confirmed Leanne Baulch is alive and well. Seems like with all the current aggression lately some people must be getting very nervous indeed. That comment was well and truly disgusting, in my opinion. Something big on the horizon?

I'm only guessing but I wonder if it could something to do with GA's appeal, if it may be coming up soon and people are getting very jittery in case he wins it.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

costello wrote:

Andrew wrote:Cheers. Well no doubt she will make a comment on this deliberate lie in due course.

Nina on CMoMM has just confirmed Leanne Baulch is alive and well. Seems like with all the current aggression lately some people must be getting very nervous indeed. That comment was well and truly disgusting, in my opinion. Something big on the horizon?

I'm only guessing but I wonder if it could something to do with GA's appeal, if it may be coming up soon and people are getting very jittery in case he wins it.

I was thinking along the same lines DFM, is the appeal scheduled for November as was stated? if so, we are only talking of a matter of weeks until the case begins, so yes could explain a lot.

Are there No Depths to which the McCanns and their supporters will not stoop ?

Is there no LIE they will not tell ?

Is there no threat they will not use ?

There are few adjectives we could use in public to describe these people.

costello wrote:
I'm only guessing but I wonder if it could something to do with GA's appeal, if it may be coming up soon and people are getting very jittery in case he wins it.

I was thinking along the same lines DFM, is the appeal scheduled for November as was stated? if so, we are only talking of a matter of weeks until the case begins, so yes could explain a lot.[/quote]
=====================================

Do you think this is someway connected to the spambots on the #McCann ?     I admit I don't understand that as I don't do Twitter, but it was suggested that might be an attempt to shut down communication on social media?

Could these unpleasant posts over there be some attempt to do the same here?    Is it possible?

I sound quite paranoid I think, and maybe this isn't the thread to mention such things so delete if inappropriate.  All imo only of course.

PeterMac wrote:Are there No Depths to which the McCanns and their supporters will not stoop ?

Is there no LIE they will not tell ?

Is there no threat they will not use ?

There are few adjectives we could use in public to describe these people.

Can I add this please PeterMac  




Wouldn't an innocent person be ashamed to be associated with such people ??

bluebell wrote:
Can I add this please PeterMac  

Wouldn't an innocent person be ashamed to be associated with such people ??

Decent people would have made a statement dissociating themselves from any activity of this nature. A long time ago.
However, since the family was involved in the preparation and delivery of the Dossier of Death - as Sir BHH confirmed - which led directly to the death of a pensioner,
any attempt by the McCanns at this late stage to disassociate themselves from evil of this nature is unlikely to be taken very seriously.
And if they did it through Mitchell we would be entitled to assume that they Associated themselves . . .

They are trapped in a mendacious whirligig of their own making.

PeterMac wrote:

bluebell wrote:
Can I add this please PeterMac  

Wouldn't an innocent person be ashamed to be associated with such people ??

Decent people would have made a statement dissociating themselves from any activity of this nature.  A long time ago.
However, since the family was involved in the preparation and delivery of the Dossier of Death - as Sir BHH confirmed - which led directly to the death of a pensioner,
any attempt by the McCanns at this late stage to disassociate themselves from evil of this nature is unlikely to be taken very seriously.
And if they did it through Mitchell we would be entitled to assume that they Associated themselves . . .

They are trapped in a mendacious whirligig of their own making.

I agree PM but the McCanns have had 8 years to disassociate themselves with the scum who talk/act on their behalf and not once have I ever seen or heard the McCanns say "we do not want these people acting on our behalf, we totally disagree with the campaign they are carrying out".  If I was a parent of a missing child and I read/saw what was going on, I would be horrified, but it's strange that it has never bothered the McCanns.

As the saying goes "You lay down with dogs, you get up with their fleas".

TM must be covered with flea bites.

From the GoFundMe website.....

http://www.gofundme.com/Legal-DefencePJGA

£60
Not Being Conned
41 mins ago
A donation to round the figure up to £37,300 and to put 2 fingers up to those who are trying to get the McCann Twitter hashtag closed down through bombarding it with spam bots - £30.00. And another 2 fingers to the person who deliberately lied on this website that Leanne had passed away no doubt hoping to stop people from donating (what a nasty piece of work he/or she is to have posted that) another £30.00.

bluebell wrote:

costello wrote:
I'm only guessing but I wonder if it could something to do with GA's appeal, if it may be coming up soon and people are getting very jittery in case he wins it.

I was thinking along the same lines DFM, is the appeal scheduled for November as was stated? if so, we are only talking of a matter of weeks until the case begins, so yes could explain a lot.

=====================================

Do you think this is someway connected to the spambots on the #McCann ?     I admit I don't understand that as I don't do Twitter, but it was suggested that might be an attempt to shut down communication on social media?

Could these unpleasant posts over there be some attempt to do the same here?    Is it possible?

I sound quite paranoid I think, and maybe this isn't the thread to mention such things so delete if inappropriate.  All imo only of course.[/quote]

For what it is worth bluebell, I do think there is a strategic plan to try and either quell or disrupt any social media outlets
right now. Who knows the reason, I only follow certain tags on twitter (I don't participate in any way) including #McCann there does seem to be a bombardment with spambots with most places I visit , so too coincidental for my liking. Aquila on CMoMM (today @1.27 on the Fund hits £30,000 + thread ) mentions the problem people that have arrived over there
or words to that effect. Todays antics with Leanne Baulch only bolster my opinions.

PeterMac wrote:Are there No Depths to which the McCanns and their supporters will not stoop ?

Is there no LIE they will not tell ?

Is there no threat they will not use ?

There are few adjectives we could use in public to describe these people.

Totally agree, what I don't understand here is, when I read that disgusting (Leanne Baulch) comment on gofundme this morning, all I could think off was how it would strengthen the fund, so what was the point? Seems to me that maybe the donator wasn't quite tuned in here.

I can completely understand you seeing "red", PeterMac.

What a great comment on gofundme PeterMac, kudos to you, hopefully a benefactor will be found.

No Stone unturned
No Lie untold
No Threat unposed
No Depth unplumbed
>
>

Reminds me of a quote from an old eighties film, Karate Kid.

'The enemy deserves no mercy'

I should imagine that's the slogan pinned up in Team Mc's headquarters (and bb1's bedroom)

Admin, the total has now reached £37,900.  Could you amend the rolling strip at the top of the page, thanks very much.

Let's wait till it gets to £38,000 - won't be long.

Freedom wrote:Let's wait till it gets to £38,000 - won't be long.

OK, I'll leave it in your capable hands.  

When I was working I used to update my company's website, I don't know much about updating forums, so perhaps there is more to it than I thought.

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Freedom wrote:Let's wait till it gets to £38,000 - won't be long.

OK, I'll leave it in your capable hands.  

When I was working I used to update my company's website, I don't know much about updating forums, so perhaps there is more to it than I thought.

It's been updated now.

candyfloss wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Freedom wrote:Let's wait till it gets to £38,000 - won't be long.

OK, I'll leave it in your capable hands.  

When I was working I used to update my company's website, I don't know much about updating forums, so perhaps there is more to it than I thought.

It's been updated now.

Thanks.  Apologies if I expected too much, you and Freedom do such a good job administering the forum, I'll keep my trap shut in future.  

I've just found this great comment on Amazon, I don't belong to their forum but I often read the comments.  I hope Textuseless won't mind me copying it here.  It was posted this morning -

Textuseless says:


I see that an online comment from the pro haters has resulted in another surge in donations to the Amaral legal expenses fund! 

When announcing the formal lodging of his appeal in June, Amaral stated: "I am so very grateful to each and every one of you, who have supported me and continue to do so; none of this would have been possible without you."

If there is one thing that will annoy the McCann 'supporters' more than Amaral winning the appeal, it will be the fact that he was financed by those they hate.

But actually, the McCann 'supporters' themselves were directly responsible for publicising the Amaral legal expenses fund, which only really took off when some tabloids published the ludicrous claims by the 'supporters' that donors to the fund were 'trolls'. In comment after comment, it was quite clear that that was what brought the legal expenses fund to their attention, and spurred many ordinary people to donate, and history has repeated itself with the latest backfired effort by the hater pros.

To think that so-called McCann 'supporters' have played such a big part in enabling Amaral to appeal...! Their responsibility will be even greater if he wins, but they never seem to learn - Amaral could hardly wish for more effective fundraisers.

A good comment left on the go fund me site.

Copied over:

£10
Andy Hopkins
I make this payment on behalf of the Xavier Bastin and Robyn Kelly accounts from the press watchdog the Independent (HA HA HA) Press Standards Organisation who are not doing their job and ensuring that the press abide by the Code of Practise.

From a reply I sent to Robyn and Xavier: You're obviously having difficulty accepting the press have broken your code of practise and that you should be acting on it so I'll put it another way. Let's assume this is an entirely new case breaking today. Which of the following 3 statements are acceptable for the press to print using just Clause 1 – Accuracy of your code of practise as a guideline, which they should be anyway!

1) Child A was abducted from their families holiday apartment - No evidence (forensic or physical) and no facts whatsoever to substantiate this claim.

2) Child A has disappeared from their families holiday apartment.

3) Child A died in their families holiday apartment and the parents are directly involved in the subsequent cover up of the death, concealment and disposal of the body, assisted, aided and abetted by members of a group of friends they travelled with and members of several government departments - A wealth of evidence (physical and forensic), facts, contradictions, anomalies, witness testimony etc to substantiate this claim.

I'll narrow it down for you to make it easier. Which of these should the press NOT report in the papers using your code of practise as the guideline?? Hint: It's not 2 or 3. Using your Clause 1 – Accuracy in this matter it is obvious to conclude that by stating that Madeleine McCann was abducted is inaccurate (due to no facts and no evidence), it's misleading (press do not print ANY of the evidence/facts freely available in the public domain that points people to what really happened) and it's distorted (just because Madeleine is missing doesn't mean she was abducted. The evidence and facts available show you that). You yourselves - the IPSO do not dispute the fact that there is no evidence to support the press printing the abduction scenario over and over again. Are you aware that by failing to act you are complicit in not only failing to do your duty and uphold your own code of practise but also in covering up the the truth of what really happened in Praia da Luz in May 2007?