Kate McCann’s Diary & Gerry McCann’s Blog Comparison. Renewed lay out for easier reading

Kate McCann’s Diary & Gerry McCann’s Blog Comparison. Renewed lay out for easier reading
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DIARY_BLOG.htm

pamalam wrote:Kate McCann’s Diary & Gerry McCann’s Blog Comparison. Renewed lay out for easier reading
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DIARY_BLOG.htm

After getting back I decided to go running' for the first time since THE day (already 11 days ago). I knew that it was going to be physically difficult, but I also knew that I wasn't going to give up, because it was for Madeleine and also because the level of pain is far higher now.

No cameras or journalists, which was great. I went running towards the beach and then along it and again climbed that hill so steep 'without stopping! (I carried a photo of M in my hand to keep me going.) On the last hill past the tennis courts my legs completely weak, but I managed to keep myself walking. I managed to reach the apartment then time to stop' to think' I felt really quite calm.


Bonkers!

ann_chovey wrote:

pamalam wrote:Kate McCann’s Diary & Gerry McCann’s Blog Comparison. Renewed lay out for easier reading
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/DIARY_BLOG.htm

After getting back I decided to go running' for the first time since THE day (already 11 days ago). I knew that it was going to be physically difficult, but I also knew that I wasn't going to give up, because it was for Madeleine and also because the level of pain is far higher now.

No cameras or journalists, which was great. I went running towards the beach and then along it and again climbed that hill so steep 'without stopping! (I carried a photo of M in my hand to keep me going.) On the last hill past the tennis courts my legs completely weak, but I managed to keep myself walking. I managed to reach the apartment then time to stop' to think' I felt really quite calm.


Bonkers!

And how self praising too, it is me me me all the time with KM in my opinion. Her pain, what about your poor daughter Kate, your pain is as nothing.

MONDAY, MAY 14: I slept well last night after a not very good end of the day, frustration with the FLO (Portuguese police family liaison officer) asking me where would my little M be.

I got up at 06.50. I dealt with some trifles and got myself ready for the statement to the press at 08.00.

I tried to put on a slightly more presentable and 'healthy' air. Gerry again gave a great performance.

Following on we answered about four questions. I almost responded to the first one asking how we were, but I didn't. I did answer a question on our possible return home. I replied that obviously I didn't even think about that. Anyway, it seemed to have gone well. After breakfast and our having left S and A, (twins Sean and Amelie, then aged two) we went to church to pray in silence. Very good, calming.

The couple of Sunday articles we read did not cover much of what we talked about and seemed to get some of the other stuff wrong! We stated that Sean and Amelie are sleeping in our room (in separate cots) because of other family staying with us and that we were trying to treat them as normal and not be overprotective. This came out that we were so protective we have to have them sleeping in our bed! These inaccuracies are not important in our search for Madeleine and the next phase is being planned currently.

TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

mossman wrote:TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

how would kate know there was a pedo at a shop??????

mossman wrote:TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

I agree. Surely as a GP, Kate should realise that paedos do not walk round with a flashing sign on them. They come in all shapes and sizes and from all walks of life.

chrissie wrote:

mossman wrote:TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

I agree. Surely as a GP, Kate should realise that paedos do not walk round with a flashing sign on them. They come in all shapes and sizes and from all walks of life.

Kate has heard that there is a paedophile there, therefore, someone has informed her. Logic isn't her strong point.

I did understand that tigger but one would have thought that she would have had some sort of training in her line of work. After all, isn't she duty bound to report any possible signs of child abuse or neglect?

That's why I agreed with mossman

mossman wrote:TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

Just what I thought Mossman. Seeing the two writings next to each other emphasises just how much GM is in denial - not only that, but really believes the world wants to hear about every trivial detail of their lives, just as though he`s a celebrity or Katie Price. He also comes across as if he thinks he`s leading a campaign as if he`s an army general. On the other hand, KM comes across as being totally deluded and as if she`s writing some pros for a Mills and Boon novel.

laid out like this they are quite a revelation......Gerry......


23.30 bed and prayer for Madeleine that she will be returned to us safely

ASAP.


is this an office memo.....why not just 'soon', kinda sounds nicer, less like awaiting the return of a lost brolly.


........17.00-17.30 Meet kids for high tea with other mums and dads. They love pasta and have been doing really well with their vegetables although a few chips have been squeezed in

well I never!....how do you squeeze chips into vegetables?


......We try to watch the main news

early morning and late evening but have had almost no time

to read

the newspapers or even look at the pictures!

Gerry ought to be locked up for bad grammar and lousy prose alone.

chrissie wrote:I did understand that tigger but one would have thought that she would have had some sort of training in her line of work. After all, isn't she duty bound to report any possible signs of child abuse or neglect?

That's why I agreed with mossman

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend. It was a phrase I'd come across earlier and it annoyed me then, a childish, illogical statement from a so-called educated doctor. It is a contradiction in terms as it were.

Kate would definitely be obliged to report child neglect to the social services. It's part of the job. So she and Gerry couldn't possibly have been 'naive' about it 'at worst'. But the worst they did was being 'naive' - as Gerry clearly states in his blog.
In interviews they often give the impression it's all MW's fault for not having listening checks (would NEVER satisfy me) and because they were led to believe it was such a safe haven.
Despite having been warned about a spate of burglaries shortly before their arrival.

She had "heard" that there was a paedophile at the shops? Was this a little titbit that was doing the rounds? Imagine it:

Mystery Person: Ah Kate, are you going to the supermarket?

Kmccann: Yes, I thought I would go and get some more bleach, we are right out of it.
MP: Well, I had heard that there is a paedophile at the shops
KM: really? what does he look like
MP: Don't know but i am sure you will recognise him.

A bit like during the war when the word went round that there were oranges available!!!!!

tigger wrote:

chrissie wrote:I did understand that tigger but one would have thought that she would have had some sort of training in her line of work. After all, isn't she duty bound to report any possible signs of child abuse or neglect?

That's why I agreed with mossman

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend. It was a phrase I'd come across earlier and it annoyed me then, a childish, illogical statement from a so-called educated doctor. It is a contradiction in terms as it were.

Kate would definitely be obliged to report child neglect to the social services. It's part of the job. So she and Gerry couldn't possibly have been 'naive' about it 'at worst'. So the worst they did was being 'naive' - as Gerry clearly states in his blog.
In interviews they often give the impression it's all MW's fault for not having listening checks (would NEVER satisfy me) and because they were led to believe it was such a safe haven.
Despite having been warned about a spate of burglaries shortly before their arrival.

Hi tigger, I wasn't offended I think I just misunderstood your post. It's all clear now and we are definitely on the same wavelength!

If you add the word "because" to her first sentance, it would read as if Kate went to the shops because she heard there was a paedophile there ! So its a case of sitting by the pool, when somebody (just making conversation as you do) says oh there is a paedophile down in Baptista doing his shopping. Oh I think I will go and have a look.???

The second statement is bizzare though. That any grown woman, a mother of three children, feels the need to say she would be more careful if she was warned about dangers, is pure lunacy, unless of course she has lived in a cave all of her life.

Yet another excuse and another way to say it is not their fault. So if you arrive at any holiday destination, you should be warned to watch out for the paedophiles, in the same way you might be warned about crocodiles ?

You should be given a list on arrival at the airport to cover everything from being beaten up and robbed, abduction by paedophiles, drowing in a pool, dying from severe food poisining and everything else in between. Then told to enjoy your stay. According to Kate, of course.

Nuts the two of them are.

I have been on holiday in that area, not PDL itself, but the next resort along. As I recall the journey from the airport (Faro) was almost 2 hours. I can recall looking out of the window of the coach on this long and winding journey and seeing beggers and also gypsys in little roadside camps and then just complete wilderness type country and I recall gradually the landscape changing and then coming into the resort which looked very well laid out with lovely landscaped grounds and inviting hotels and dropping other passengers off at their hotels. I am something of a people watcher and I remember looking at some of the individuals on the coach and some of those hanging around in relaxed fashion in the resort who were on holiday there, and they were a mixed bunch indeed, as you would get in any medium priced holiday resort.

To describe it as safe, as they did, is not naive, its a con imo. I think when people say they feel safe somewhere, they mean they feel as if they can go out into the town at night on their own if they are single, have a stroll round with no one bothering them. They mean no gangs of lager filled youths and no-one jumping out in front of you selling timeshare. For a family, feeling safe means safe to take your children out with you at night for a meal without hearing foul language from people who have been drinking too much, safe because the locals are so friendly and because children are made to feel so welcome and safe because the atmosphere is so informal and relaxed, which is healthy for children.

It is a con imo to say feeling safe means you can leave your children in the apartment whilst you go out and even leave your door unlocked. Even in the friendliest of resorts and the quietest of resorts the hotel management would not recommend that.

mossman wrote:TUESDAY, JUNE 26: I went for a short walk to the shops nearby. I had heard that there was a paedophile there. Nice, isn't it'

If people informed us about these criminals of course we'd be more cautious and we'd feel safer!



What in the name of all that is holy is this supposed to mean ?

It is quite some time since I have read those diary and blog entries. Re-visiting them today has reinforced my opinion that these two people are truly unwell. [i]

Hi Mossman, a classic case, reminiscent of McCarthyism?
The 'Red under the bed', promoting the idea that these
paedophiles are lurking everywhere, and many people
know where they are.Isn't the Algarve a haven for these
unsavoury devils? Well according to Kate, and in her words,
it is such a place.

.