'Boycott this vile man now', urge charities

Perhaps the McCanns or Clarence Mitchell can explain just how and why they have spent millions having Amaral's book banned while they have made not one iota of effort to block Frankie Boyle's pathetic attempt at humour....

Surely their reason couldn't be that Amaral's literary work would irrefutably challenge the McCann's version of what happened to Madeleine.

PS. Thanks Annabel for posting this.

malena stool wrote:Perhaps the McCanns or Clarence Mitchell can explain just how and why they have spent millions having Amaral's book banned while they have made not one iota of effort to block Frankie Boyle's pathetic attempt at humour....

Surely their reason couldn't be that Amaral's literary work would irrefutably challenge the McCann's version of what happened to Madeleine.

Maybe they'll wait with this one too to see if it's going to make enough money to make Boyle worth suing!

I don't find Frankie Boyle funny and wouldn't willingly listen to his act but, if it was a choice between an earful of him or the McCanns at their nauseating whining money-grabbing worst, it would be an easy decision to make! If that was the only remark he made about Madeleine, he wasn't mocking her - he was making a point about the Catholic Church with which many would agree.

Yes Gerry this man has spoke of Madeleine in the worst way possible, using her for the butt of his joke, what do you do NOTHING! because your sooo busy going after the man that has only ever tried to find out what happened to your Daughter, Snr Amaral ........Feb 2012 everything is going to change!

LIBEL CASE, REVIEW, PAT BROWN.....I for one is really really looking forward to 2012.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:I don't find Frankie Boyle funny and wouldn't willingly listen to his act but, if it was a choice between an earful of him or the McCanns at their nauseating whining money-grabbing worst, it would be an easy decision to make! If that was the only remark he made about Madeleine, he wasn't mocking her - he was making a point about the Catholic Church with which many would agree.

Its also a slight on the Mc's dont you think Not Born Yesterday! Their child is missing and what do they do - they go to Rome to see the Pope of course - a bit like the Wizzard of Oz!

Yes I agree No Stone - it's a wonder Frankie Boyle hasn't been sent to the Tower! I've just found a really yucky story from the time of the visit to the Pope.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458217/Madeleine-The-McCanns-moment-hope-Pope.html

Not Born Yesterday wrote:Yes I agree No Stone - it's a wonder Frankie Boyle hasn't been sent to the Tower! I've just found a really yucky story from the time of the visit to the Pope.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458217/Madeleine-The-McCanns-moment-hope-Pope.html

Thanks Not Born Yesterday - you've made me right sick this afty -

But amid remarkable scenes, played out before a 35,000-strong crowd and a worldwide television audience, they were able to draw comfort from what they described as the Holy Father's tender words and gentle touch.

Like the 35,000 'other pilgrims' were gathered there just for them

They had flown to Rome on a billionaire benefactor?s luxury jet, stayed overnight in an ambassador's residence, and travelled with a police escort and media entourage. Then they were granted the kind of access to the Pope that most Roman Catholics could only imagine. The attention they attracted was akin to a royal visit. Yet they will have to be extremely careful that this turning point in their campaign does not sway public opinion against them. They must find a delicate balance between keeping Madeleine in the public mind, and avoiding criticism of the astonishing combination of slick organisation, high-profile backing and seemingly limitless help that has been afforded them.

..and of course a fine balance between when you use the press and when you accuse it of abusing!!

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458217/Madeleine-The-McCanns-moment-hope-Pope.html#ixzz1eFls2f2s

NoStone wrote:

Not Born Yesterday wrote:Yes I agree No Stone - it's a wonder Frankie Boyle hasn't been sent to the Tower! I've just found a really yucky story from the time of the visit to the Pope.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458217/Madeleine-The-McCanns-moment-hope-Pope.html

Thanks Not Born Yesterday - you've made me right sick this afty -

But amid remarkable scenes, played out before a 35,000-strong crowd and a worldwide television audience, they were able to draw comfort from what they described as the Holy Father's tender words and gentle touch.

Like the 35,000 'other pilgrims' were gathered there just for them

They had flown to Rome on a billionaire benefactor?s luxury jet, stayed overnight in an ambassador's residence, and travelled with a police escort and media entourage. Then they were granted the kind of access to the Pope that most Roman Catholics could only imagine. The attention they attracted was akin to a royal visit. Yet they will have to be extremely careful that this turning point in their campaign does not sway public opinion against them. They must find a delicate balance between keeping Madeleine in the public mind, and avoiding criticism of the astonishing combination of slick organisation, high-profile backing and seemingly limitless help that has been afforded them.

..and of course a fine balance between when you use the press and when you accuse it of abusing!!

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-458217/Madeleine-The-McCanns-moment-hope-Pope.html#ixzz1eFls2f2s

There was a group there that day from Brazil, a group of people working with homeless street children. They never got anywhere near the Pope.

Why are Charities wanting the boycott? Madeleine's so called "fund" is not a charity and I see no insults to charities there. Why are they not sticking to their remit - charitable work.

I had a response from Charity Commission regarding my concerns about the "fund" masquerading as a charity. Got the response - it is up to the "donors" to check if it is a charity or not and find out for themselves if the accounts are free available and where any donated money is spent.

If I can find the letter I will share it.

I got it 2 months ago and am still so angry that that is their response. Not yet calmed down enough to reply - even though they said this is the end of the discussion as far as they were concerned.

malena stool wrote:Perhaps the McCanns or Clarence Mitchell can explain just how and why they have spent millions having Amaral's book banned while they have made not one iota of effort to block Frankie Boyle's pathetic attempt at humour....

Surely their reason couldn't be that Amaral's literary work would irrefutably challenge the McCann's version of what happened to Madeleine.

PS. Thanks Annabel for posting this.

Perhaps they are waiting to see if the book makes megga money before suing.

It's not that simple. They are not worried as they will get sympathy regarding Frankie Boyle. Did they sue Danny Collins who said Madeleine had wandered off?

They only sue those who question their fairy tales (in my opinion) and lately since lost to Amaral (in the injuction trial) are keeping quiet about it.

Forgot to say they only bother if it is in English (which says something about them).

Well, I had a read of this article in M&S coffee shop (I sure as hell wasn't paying for it!) and it seems really quite clear to me.

Everybody knows what Frankie Boyle's humour is like. If you don't like it, then don't buy his book. It really is that simple.

The Express were howling that the book "comes with no content warning." Well, neither does Kate's.

Then the Express were so outraged and disgusted by this "content" that they reprinted the "jokes" in the article! With no content warning!

You couldn't make this stuff up.

Iris wrote:Well, I had a read of this article in M&S coffee shop (I sure as hell wasn't paying for it!) and it seems really quite clear to me.

Everybody knows what Frankie Boyle's humour is like. If you don't like it, then don't buy his book. It really is that simple.

The Express were howling that the book "comes with no content warning." Well, neither does Kate's.

Then the Express were so outraged and disgusted by this "content" that they reprinted the "jokes" in the article! With no content warning!

You couldn't make this stuff up.

Iris -