PurpleElly
Member
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Hey girls
Not posted on this board very often - just joined a few weeks ago.
I started reading the beginning of the thread, then made my way to the end of the thread.
I'm glad to see there's other girls with a healthy, questioning mind, and some others that look beyond what's presented to them in the press (and read further).
Not sure what other vids have been posted earlier in the thread, but here's a couple of recent ones - particularly answering discrepancies in her book.
I agree with so many of the posts on here, disputing their allegations of abduction - when the official files contradict that claim, and the evidence of the dogs etc suggest Madeleine tragically died in their appartment. I guess even Gerry technically isn't lying when he says there's no 'evidence' she's dead - because the DNA evidence wasn't conclusive enough, or they'd have been charged. DNA samples found at the spots where cadaver odour was identified. On the subject of 'no evidence she's come to harm', that really pisses me off, cos in the event even that the abduction scenario was true, she'd have been harmed by being left alone, then harmed by being abducted then harmed by her abductor - even a 'benign' one - what a fantasy, eh?!!
The more I read recently, especially in the interviews about the book, the more I see it. I believe that obviously, some aspects of the book will be true - their feelings - because basing it on the assumption she has died, then they will been grieving. Their language is ambiguous - they say 'taken' a lot of the time - which besides being their shorthand for being abducted, is also a euphemism for passing away, which means it's easier for them to not lie when talking to the press. Also, their descriptions of what happened - being immobilised for the first few days, and acting in grief (I think it's the Vanity Fair interview, you can find in on the McCann Files website) describes that. To me, that's the difference - if they knew she was dead, they would be grieving and unable to function, whereas if one of my pets was even missing, I become hysterical until I find them (I'm still TTC, no beautiful kids yet).
Oh, I'm not allowed to post web links, as I've not posted often enough, so search on You-tube for discrepancies in Kate McCann's book.
Elly x
Not posted on this board very often - just joined a few weeks ago.
I started reading the beginning of the thread, then made my way to the end of the thread.
I'm glad to see there's other girls with a healthy, questioning mind, and some others that look beyond what's presented to them in the press (and read further).
Not sure what other vids have been posted earlier in the thread, but here's a couple of recent ones - particularly answering discrepancies in her book.
I agree with so many of the posts on here, disputing their allegations of abduction - when the official files contradict that claim, and the evidence of the dogs etc suggest Madeleine tragically died in their appartment. I guess even Gerry technically isn't lying when he says there's no 'evidence' she's dead - because the DNA evidence wasn't conclusive enough, or they'd have been charged. DNA samples found at the spots where cadaver odour was identified. On the subject of 'no evidence she's come to harm', that really pisses me off, cos in the event even that the abduction scenario was true, she'd have been harmed by being left alone, then harmed by being abducted then harmed by her abductor - even a 'benign' one - what a fantasy, eh?!!
The more I read recently, especially in the interviews about the book, the more I see it. I believe that obviously, some aspects of the book will be true - their feelings - because basing it on the assumption she has died, then they will been grieving. Their language is ambiguous - they say 'taken' a lot of the time - which besides being their shorthand for being abducted, is also a euphemism for passing away, which means it's easier for them to not lie when talking to the press. Also, their descriptions of what happened - being immobilised for the first few days, and acting in grief (I think it's the Vanity Fair interview, you can find in on the McCann Files website) describes that. To me, that's the difference - if they knew she was dead, they would be grieving and unable to function, whereas if one of my pets was even missing, I become hysterical until I find them (I'm still TTC, no beautiful kids yet).
Oh, I'm not allowed to post web links, as I've not posted often enough, so search on You-tube for discrepancies in Kate McCann's book.
Elly x