rickiethecat Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Decide who committed the crime and then make the facts fit seems to be your reason for blaming the McCanns. I hope you will be in line to offer apologies to the couple if the abductor is traced. The abductor that still hasn't been traced after four years of the most high profile child abduction case the world has ever known? Does anyone really think this supposed abductor ever existed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teenyweeny Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Excellent post, sums up my feelings to a "T". Thanks for sharing. brilliant post..x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teenyweeny Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 remembering madelaine today,i hope the evil person/persons get brought to justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neeeeeeeeeek Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 What I still find unbelievable is that the McCanns left three children "home alone", had a child "taken" and YET they are still allowed to keep their other two children WITHOUT the intervention of Social Services. Now had they been unemployed, on benefits, well....................! They would have popped a couple more out so not to miss out on the child benefit. How would taking their other 2 children off them help anyone? Why is it unbelievable? Do you honestly think that taking their other kids off them is beneficial to anyone? There are loads of nasty people on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laineyiow Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 They would have popped a couple more out so not to miss out on the child benefit. How would taking their other 2 children off them help anyone? Why is it unbelievable? Do you honestly think that taking their other kids off them is beneficial to anyone? There are loads of nasty people on here. All I was saying that HAD they been on benefits or unemployed then they could (well actually WOULD) in all probability have had their other two children taken off them by Social Services! I am not saying that having their children taken off them would help anyone at all - all I am stating is what I know and that is that this CAN and DOES happen to less fortunate people! Oh! and I am NOT a nasty person! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neeeeeeeeeek Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 All I was saying that HAD they been on benefits or unemployed then they could (well actually WOULD) in all probability have had their other two children taken off them by Social Services! I am not saying that having their children taken off them would help anyone at all - all I am stating is what I know and that is that this CAN and DOES happen to less fortunate people! Oh! and I am NOT a nasty person! There are thousands of kids out there who's parents are on benefits who are not fit to be in charge of kids, if the rubbish you were spouting was in any way true then those kids would have been removed a long time ago. Take that massive chip off your shoulder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ sheffield Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 Excellent post, sums up my feelings to a "T". Thanks for sharing. I'll second that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 There are thousands of kids out there who's parents are on benefits who are not fit to be in charge of kids, if the rubbish you were spouting was in any way true then those kids would have been removed a long time ago. Take that massive chip off your shoulder. I dont think its anything to do with having a chip,as far as Im aware social services have not been involved which considering the McAnns admission that they left them unattended beggars belief.As ffor the thousands that you quote ,that is quite likely to be true but social services will only act if they have been informed or as a bi product from a criminal investigation ..cue investigate the McAnns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laineyiow Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I dont think its anything to do with having a chip,as far as Im aware social services have not been involved which considering the McAnns admission that they left them unattended beggars belief.As ffor the thousands that you quote ,that is quite likely to be true but social services will only act if they have been informed or as a bi product from a criminal investigation ..cue investigate the McAnns. This is exactly the point that I was trying to make Glamrocker. Why haven't social services been involved with the McCanns? And I still stick to my view that if the same thing had happened to someone who was unemployed and on benefits then social services would have been in there and taken the other children "in the interests of safety and protection of the remaining children!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddie Posted May 12, 2011 Share Posted May 12, 2011 I'll second that. I'll third that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.