[ubermik]

And opinions as is common knowledge are coincidentally JUST like ass holes, every rusty bullethole has one

[ubermik]

@vector wrote:

yes that might be true ube,everyone give the family a break fgs

Are they reading this thread then? If not I really dont understand what youre yapping about :lol:

[ubermik]

@anita Gofradump wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

I like twisting it tho :wink:

Well matty is single, ask him, im sure he will twist it for you. :twisted:

…..it’s that or Killer Queen in her leopard suit

Well thanx for the thoughts but as the saying goes “if you want a job doing properly then DIY” :wink:

As for the leapord “queen”. isnt that a leapard king wearing the queens playtime clothes whilst waiting for the drier to finish? :D

[ubermik]

I understand your viewpoint, but its grammatically incorrect, about 200 years out of date and isnt socially acurate

The definition of “a life” is for one thing varied, as are the reasons behind it

But the word “murder” is a very specific and well documented SOLITARY meaning that only fits one such taking of a life which is oddly enough when it IS, by definition classed under the legal sense as a ,,,,,,,,,, wait for it…………..murder

The rest of the time the raking of an alleged life goes by the specific name for each scenario some of which (Although not all allowed here) would include abortion, euthenasia, execution, suicide, assisted suicide, collateral damage (warfare), valid combatant fatalities (warfare again), justified/legal killing (self defence, or defence of someone else), accidental death, manslaughter, turning off the life support to someone who is ONLY brain dead (dunno the correct term for that) and a few others that I am sure I could think of if needed

ALL of those are by clinical definition the ending of a life, but NONE of them are by any rational. legal or modally accepted social definition “murder”

Thats a view held only by some quite narrow minded fanatical zealots such as yourself who lack the ability to let other people preside over their own choices, lives and bodies and seek to invasively dictate to them what YOU wnat them to do

An action that I am sure where the shoe on the other foot and someone was dictating to you what YOU should do then you would oppose it vehemently

On topics like this, as with most people related topics there isnt a “right” or “wrong”, just personal opinions and a social modal agreed view which in a democracy, or more acurately as there isnt any such thing as an actual democracy an “oligarchy” the modal view takes preceedence over any dissenting views as the majority is, or should be the deciding view

So yes I understand your statement gramatically, even to an extent the driving forces and views behind it, I also accept your right to PERSONALLY hold that view and apply it to your own body and personal choices

I dont however think its a valid social view, nor that it should be fanatically and manipulatively thrust upon people who are already in a stressful enough situation to begin with and nor do I pay any heed to the rather zealous almost religious lack of open mindedness, tolerance or respect for other equally valid views that mindsets on this sort of topic try to exert and nor do I accept you have any moral or righteous highground from which to preach from on the topic, its just a view, nothing more, and no more right or wrong than any other view on the subject except where personal choices in personal situations are concerned in which case right or wrong is decided by the individual

I would however bet that I have a better grasp of the complexities of YOUR comments than you will of mine but we cant all be open minded and well balanced eh? And message boards would be message “boreds” if it were the case lol :lol: :lol:

[ubermik]

Wheres the vomit emoticon when you need one eh? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[ubermik]

@vector wrote:

@vector wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@abitofmary_j wrote:

@vector wrote:

f/ck you slapper

Id rather be a slapper anyday than a BEAST

Which oddly enough seems to be the one thing he CANT do even tho he obviously still wants to lol

Bless :)

And he says “slapper” like its a bad thing :O:O:O:O

How NOT so is that :lol: :lol: :lol:

clever coont int ya are you german

and leave mary out of it its fook all to do with you mr long post

Well einstein, where do I start?

1) half irish, half scottish and half english (not german at all at all at all lol) och, and crap at maths too :lol:

3) Wheres 2? :o :O:O

2) Phew, there it is

z) Its a PUBLIC message board DUH!!!!! The important word there is PUBLIC! If you dont want other peoples responses to a PRIVATE discussion then make it a PRIVATE one eh? Otherwise dont whinge and whine about other peoples contributions like a six year old girl who cant have the doll she wants

8) Who mentioned mary? Or was that a rather inneffectual attempt to look like you were sticking up for her as a means to ingratiating yourself with her? Because unless she IS dimwitted enough to have seen a non existant slurr aimed at her then I really cant see the point of your “defence” of her honour really

x) And judging from the back and forth I reckon a) she can easily enough defend her own honour IF she feels its needed and b) if she did want someone else to pitch in I dont really think you would be anywhere the top of the list of likely avatars for her really, do you?

99) Did I mention it was a PUBLIC MESSAGE BOARD!!!!!!!!! (its an important point that one lol)

[ubermik]

@abitofmary_j wrote:

@vector wrote:

f/ck you slapper

Id rather be a slapper anyday than a BEAST

Which oddly enough seems to be the one thing he CANT do even tho he obviously still wants to lol

Bless :)

And he says “slapper” like its a bad thing :O:O:O:O

How NOT so is that :lol: :lol: :lol:

[ubermik]

I most definitely WONT give it up,,,,,,,,,,,without being wined and dined first :D:D:D

(well, to be fair a half of lager and a bag of scampi fries (just to give me the taste) usually does the trick lol ;))

[ubermik]

@ubermik wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@pats wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

FFS give me bloody strength. Do I have to write this in punjabi before you get my point?
When I said about the kids getting out of the apartment that was just an example I was trying but failing dismally to show. IF, note, IF, they had got out and done what I suggested and ended up getting run over, would you have been so quick to defend the useless McCanns then? Or would you have thought, like the vast majority of us would, that they were grossly negligent in leaving the doors, unlocked in the first place. Geddit now? jeez, I,m worn out now. :roll: ](*,)

you would be surprised what 3 yr olds can do fasty if they are determined enough.

:lol:

haha :lol:

This looks SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO funny with all the sequential quoting :lol: :lol: :lol:

I iz so easily amused I iz innit :oops:

[ubermik]

@ubermik wrote:

@pats wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

FFS give me bloody strength. Do I have to write this in punjabi before you get my point?
When I said about the kids getting out of the apartment that was just an example I was trying but failing dismally to show. IF, note, IF, they had got out and done what I suggested and ended up getting run over, would you have been so quick to defend the useless McCanns then? Or would you have thought, like the vast majority of us would, that they were grossly negligent in leaving the doors, unlocked in the first place. Geddit now? jeez, I,m worn out now. :roll: ](*,)

you would be surprised what 3 yr olds can do fasty if they are determined enough.

:lol:

haha :lol:

[Author]

Posts