pap

Given the amount of prior and consequent criminal convictions of many of the detective agencies' staff, coupled with zero experience in tracking down missing kids, those agencies look like the last place you'd go to if you were serious about finding a missing child. They were ideal for generating stories of suspects, etc - but could never be seen as a serious means to achieve the job that they have been employed for.

Who holds back the electric car? Who made Steve Guttenberg... a star? We do. We do

Tell them that if they don't sort it out, you have powerful friends within the Stonecutters and the No-Homers.

Hall's movie benefits from the passage of time. The sniffer dogs are a good example. Instead of looking at all the cases where dog evidence had led to successful conclusions, the McCanns played up one case that seriously disputed its worth, the Zapata murder of 1976. One of the judges ruled the evidence as inadmissible, saying that dog evidence was no more reliable than the toss of a coin. Eventually, Zapata confessed to the murder of his wife in a plea bargain. The dog evidence was sound all along; it was the poor judgement of a judge (!) and Gerry McCann's tub-thumping that threw it into question. As you say, it would be interesting to see how the evidence is received in a court of law. At this point though, all Operation Grange seems to be doing is throwing up more suspects that it doesn't arrest. We've had newspaper reports that the coppers were flying out to make arrests twice this year already, yet no arrests have been made.

Ah, it's not like it would have been a completely original idea. Other players have tried to go on strike, but let's face it, this isn't a worthy struggle against corporate oppression and better rights for workers. It's ludicrously well remunerated athletes getting paid to do something we all did as kids for fun, moaning about how green the grass is at other grounds. They get away with it too. Kenwyne Jones' career hasn't really suffered. We might be the only people that bang on about it, and even we're not that arsed. Ultimately, I think pragmatism lies at the heart of Morgan's decision. The board had no financial reason to sell him and his position is covered, with funds to cover again if necessary. I reckon private assurances have been made that this'll be his last season as a Saints player. I can live with that if we can re-invest on current form. If he'd gone last window, the largely-dormant sense of hysteria would have erupted. Fair play to him for his decision to stay and for his performances since.

I think you are confusing me with someone that never admits he is in the wrong and/or someone that is part of a little clique. Easily done. A lot of it about.

Interesting clip here. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe confirms that coppers were handed the file by the McCanns and slips up by referring to the case as a murder investigation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6c1aRUUPgE&feature=youtu.be Also confirms that defamation is a civil matter. They'll only get involved if people are threatened.

aintforever and Verbal? No. Their crises are real.

Take your anonymous troll act someplace else, aintforever. I'd suggest the thread you left out of decency. I won't be bullied into a different opinion.

I'm waiting for the IMAX run. Why compromise?

I don't consider your opinion to be significant, so fill your boots.

I seem to remember it was you that kept asking for them. Also, I've never been anonymous. Anyone on this site can find out who I am immediately. https://twitter.com/papingu I don't hide behind anonymity, nor will I ever go screaming to the mods on a Saturday night because someone has tied my posts to my identity.

So let's get this straight. A group of people on the Internet form up, then target a bunch of people that are critical to the McCanns, then go after them - but it's sensationalist to call their behaviour "targeting". The fact that the group's raison d'etre was targeting critics doesn't diminish that whole targeting part. In fact, it makes it worse. It's premeditated, and in many instances - quite threatening. One of the main McCann shills threatened Brenda Leyland with someone knocking at her door, and that it had happened before. We either need to accept that the whole campaign was targeted or find a new definition for sensationalism. The latter isn't as hard as you'd imagine, btw - we got a new definition for troll this week, after all. I don't have a problem with anyone collecting a dossier. It's really how that information is applied that matters. The dossier was given to the McCanns, who then inexplicably gave it to the team investigating Madeleine's disappearance. The police saw no reason to act in the month it had the information, so someone evidently saw fit to raise it through the media instead, which has already attempted to play a huge role in forming opinions on the McCanns. It is one of the most striking examples of how the media misrepresents known facts. Examples include speculation treated as fact. Almost every newspaper story about the McCanns mentions the "fact" that she was abducted, despite there being no evidence of this. Similarly, Brenda Leyland was reported to have sent her messages to the McCanns and labelled a troll, impossible as neither McCann is on the social network. We're only now seeing a couple of insightful articles exploring the question of whether she was really a troll, after the woman is dead. Almost nothing has been reported of the pro-McCann shills issuing death threats, etc. Most people can identify with this case, parents especially. The only positive arising from Brenda Leyland's death is that the very small cabal of pro-McCann opinion formers have now been exposed, so to your last point, I don't have a problem with transparency, as long as it works both ways. The ideal media would report truth no matter how uncomfortable. The uncomfortable truth is that the media have worked to protect the McCanns from proper scrutiny from 2007 to today.

The only regret I have on that is timing. I'm not going to apologise for anything else. Incidentally, I don't know if you remember, but Verbal and co left that thread "out of decency". How very "decent" of them to keep bringing it up when bereft of other points. If there is anyone that should be apologising, it's those that would cynically exploit the incident in futile attempts to win unrelated mongboard arguments. This is a thread about the McCanns, btw.

For someone that asks a lot of questions, you're not in a habit of answering many. I still feel the same way about all of the conspiracy theories I've mentioned, so expect no apology from me on any of them. That you keep bringing them up in hopes of a cheap victory on unrelated topics shows how bankrupt (one note gives you too much credit) you've become as a poster. Art imitating life? Still no view on the McCanns?

Breaking it down, he left for three things. Money Exposure Champions League football (although that's really covered by exposure). The bloke can't say that playing for Saints was keeping him out of the national team. I would laugh my nipples off if we accidentally qualified for CL and Liverpool didn't* * I have no expectation of nipple loss in the next 12 months

Meh.

Guess you don't understand the meaning of "fair enough". For the record, you're right. Apart from the complete lack of arrests in a month, I have no evidence that the OB weren't interested - and ceded that if they do arrest someone, I'll happily admit I'm wrong. So far though, no arrests. Perhaps you'd like to point to where I've vilified the McCanns before going any further, or indeed, express a view of your own instead of constantly attacking the views of others. What do you have to say about the McCanns and their unique treatment?

Fair enough, but I'm right up to now - and the dossier was given to the media. My point is that they've had this a month and haven't generated any arrests from it. If they do, then fair play, I'll say that the police were interested. Doubt it, though.

C'mon now. They started a site called McCann Hate Exposed. It was a group of people on the Internet that deliberately collected information on targets and went after them. Nothing sensational to say that this was a targeted operation. The media have reported this entire case with a shameful degree of pre-judgment and obfuscation. The reporting around the "vile internet trolls" is just yet another example. The McCann Hate Exposed group delivered their complaints to the police on the 9th September. The OB weren't interested, so they took their dossier to the media instead. The site has been taken down since the death of Brenda Leyland.

Talked about this on the way to the Arsenal game. I think we've done what most clubs do when a player wants away to a big club. Promise a move in the summer in exchange for a bit of decorum in the interim. See also Suarez, Ronaldo, etc. Fantastic player though. In the very unlikely event that we do sneak into the top four, it'll be interesting to see what he decides.

Going to be the year's most quotable footy book. Liked this story http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/11144463/Roy-Keane-Cristiano-Ronaldo-joined-Manchester-United-because-he-made-John-OShea-look-like-a-clown.html

It's already been established that the only people that could possibly get why Clarkson is offensive are left-wingers, just because of his politics. So either shut your trap or join a weaving commune

Lord no. My best mates are all left-wingers from Cantell

Now here's some trolling. https://twitter.com/dirndllass At this point, a weaker debater would probably try to imply that anyone supporting the McCanns is exactly the same. Let's just say there are some nasty people in the world. Scroll down a little for the "love".