A possible reason for them all being in PDL?

ann_chovey wrote: Sorry, can't see it myself. KM's friend Linda McQueen suggested the holiday might be hard work with 3 little ones.

The McCs were the only ones to undergo IVF treatment as far as I am aware and that is well documented.

I've always assumed Gerry was advised to say 'no comment' to the Murat question by Clarence, lawyer/PR speak.

Wintabells wrote:

ann_chovey wrote: Sorry, can't see it myself. KM's friend Linda McQueen suggested the holiday might be hard work with 3 little ones.

The McCs were the only ones to undergo IVF treatment as far as I am aware and that is well documented.

I've always assumed Gerry was advised to say 'no comment' to the Murat question by Clarence, lawyer/PR speak.

(00.24)

and... I believe...this was GMcC's very first attempt at saying 'no comment'.

I can't imagine it's easy as one would imagine, saying 'no comment' - and I don't think even GMcC felt comfortable with it, hence the watered down version he came up with, 'I'm not going to comment on that'.

tigger wrote:No, I really, really don't think so.

In a lot of European countries IVF is free - I believe it is in Britain as well under some circumstances and setting up IVF treatment in PdL - not really suitable I'd think.
The fact that there were so many blond children is just because it was a holiday resort with several creches. Many northern European children are blond to start off with and I can't see any significance in it. Would the implication be that all those little blonde children had the same genes? Some super blond donor?

Imo half the Tapas had no idea what was happening and went along with the story they were told for the sake of whatever. By now I expect they have a pretty good idea and one doesn't see a united front ever, does one? Never a photograph of a couple of the Tapas joining the brave little woman for a charity run - I certainly don't think they are at all close now.

Sorry to put such a big foot down and squashing your theory - if it's any comfort, I went into cloning ideas quite some time ago and came hopelessly unstuck. Nothing so sophisticated - I don't rate either of the McCanns very highly in the intelligence stakes.

AnnaEsse wrote:I think that if there was a reason for them all to be in PDL, they were possibly looking for an apartment to buy as a group, to share for the kind of holidays they seem to like: sea and sports.

BelEddie wrote:I was visiting the Jillhaven forum again and was reading a thread entitled, " Irwins ". About halfway down the second page was the following piece. It was/is the most plausible hypothesis for this ensemble that is the T9 I have read on any MM forum.
I have CnP'ed which I hope is not against the Forum rules.
The Red highlight was done by me.
-----------------------------------

OK been holding this thought for a while but this thread seems to open it up quite nicely.

I have a feeling that this holiday was a business trip - a get together of IVF couples and their babies.

Is it possible that the 4 male Drs plus their Dr wives were involved in some sort of IVF treatment (kinda set up their own clinic without all the legalities etc) and this trip was to discuss how it was going and meet up with some of those they had already treated.

Might explain why GM said 'f off I'm not here to enjoy myself' or why KM didn't really want to go as she didn't consider it much of a holiday or a bit too risky getting everyone together.

There were certainly an awful lot of blonde 3 - 4 year olds there so we are told and an awful lot of people who all knew each other (Murat, JT, KM O'Donell all had blond daughters who all apparantly look similar)

Then you have the Irwins who it seems one of was pregnant!

Then you have GMs comment about Murat when asked if he knew him - 'no comment' which obviously means yes I do but can't tell you why.

It is said that Murat and his first wife took a long to conceive.

Lets then assume a terrible accident happened to MM and this is where the they are all connected and having to stay very quiet because they are all connected by IVF treatment (perhaps unethically).



http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3243-the-irwins

Badboy wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:I think that if there was a reason for them all to be in PDL, they were possibly looking for an apartment to buy as a group, to share for the kind of holidays they seem to like: sea and sports.

I HAVE THOUGHT ALONG SIMILIAR LINE MYSELF,THERE IS A CONNECTION WITH PROPERTY

Oldartform wrote:

Badboy wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:I think that if there was a reason for them all to be in PDL, they were possibly looking for an apartment to buy as a group, to share for the kind of holidays they seem to like: sea and sports.

I HAVE THOUGHT ALONG SIMILIAR LINE MYSELF,THERE IS A CONNECTION WITH PROPERTY

Could be why Murat sped back to PdL - he was in property and setting up his own company - maybe he was tipped the wink there were potential buyers floating about.

margaret wrote:Erm, no. Why did you add the bit about blonde children? Lots of children are blonde nothing to do with IVF.

IVF isn't a frankenstein science, but you'd need access to equipment and drugs your ordinary hospital wouldn't have, needs to be a fertility clinic, do l think they set one up to avoid £6k of treatment? No again.

Oldartform wrote:

margaret wrote:Erm, no. Why did you add the bit about blonde children? Lots of children are blonde nothing to do with IVF.

IVF isn't a frankenstein science, but you'd need access to equipment and drugs your ordinary hospital wouldn't have, needs to be a fertility clinic, do l think they set one up to avoid £6k of treatment? No again.

I don`t think the OP was actually meaning there was a clinic there! Nothing wrong with some lateral thinking - no puzzle got solved by tunnel vision.

margaret wrote:

Oldartform wrote:

margaret wrote:Erm, no. Why did you add the bit about blonde children? Lots of children are blonde nothing to do with IVF.

IVF isn't a frankenstein science, but you'd need access to equipment and drugs your ordinary hospital wouldn't have, needs to be a fertility clinic, do l think they set one up to avoid £6k of treatment? No again.

I don`t think the OP was actually meaning there was a clinic there! Nothing wrong with some lateral thinking - no puzzle got solved by tunnel vision.

No l,don't mean I literally either, but £6k of treatment is an awful lot cheaper than the hassle of obtaining the equipment they'd need, it doesn't make sense.

In any case it wasn't the OPs theory l recognise that.

kathybelle wrote:I don't know why any of this group took their children on holiday with them, they appeared to be thorns in the sides of their parents I don't know how many of the group left their children unsupervised when they went out, but it appears that the grandchildren of Diane Webster were left alone some of the evenings, because her daughter brought along a baby monitor when she and her husband along with her mother, went to the Tapas Bar.

I don't understand Diane Webster wanting to join her daughter and son-in-law, while her grandchildren were left alone. I would have thought she would have told her daughter and son-in-law, that it wasn't acceptable to leave their children alone.

I know the children of the Tapas group will have no memories of this holiday, because Madeleine was the eldest of all of the children and if she was still around, she would have very little memories of the holiday. However the parents will have memories of how they took them away and dumped them in the creche during the day and if they were speaking the truth, left them unsupervised at night.

Apart from maybe 1 or 2,hrs in the evenings these parents did nothing with their children. I know the nannies from the creche did things with the children, but at the end of the day, it should have been the parents who did these things with them. The parents won't have seen their children squealing with laughter, but the nannies will.

Come to think of it, maybe the parents don't care what their children were getting up to, while they were enjoying their leisure activities. If they cared, they wouldn't have dumped them in the creche.

tigger wrote:

kathybelle wrote:I don't know why any of this group took their children on holiday with them, they appeared to be thorns in the sides of their parents I don't know how many of the group left their children unsupervised when they went out, but it appears that the grandchildren of Diane Webster were left alone some of the evenings, because her daughter brought along a baby monitor when she and her husband along with her mother, went to the Tapas Bar.

I don't understand Diane Webster wanting to join her daughter and son-in-law, while her grandchildren were left alone. I would have thought she would have told her daughter and son-in-law, that it wasn't acceptable to leave their children alone.

I know the children of the Tapas group will have no memories of this holiday, because Madeleine was the eldest of all of the children and if she was still around, she would have very little memories of the holiday. However the parents will have memories of how they took them away and dumped them in the creche during the day and if they were speaking the truth, left them unsupervised at night.

Apart from maybe 1 or 2,hrs in the evenings these parents did nothing with their children. I know the nannies from the creche did things with the children, but at the end of the day, it should have been the parents who did these things with them. The parents won't have seen their children squealing with laughter, but the nannies will.

Come to think of it, maybe the parents don't care what their children were getting up to, while they were enjoying their leisure activities. If they cared, they wouldn't have dumped them in the creche.

O now, come, come! Kate watched Sean build a sandcastle some months later - it's in the diary. See? By implication this kind of attention was lavished on all the children. Mind you, it's pretty well the only instance recorded by her, perhaps somebody told her to put it in.

tanszi wrote:Hiya Kathybelle, its interesting that you mention why DW didnt have something to say abaout the children being left. It is a possibility that she did. Many years ago we visited my brother in laws house to find the front door open, lights blazing and the parents nowhere to be seen, with two children asleep in bed upstairs. We were both appalled as we had been invited to an evening meal with friends, not realising the meal wasnt at their home, but 4 doors down at the friends house. One of us waited whilst the other spoke to brother and sister in lawalong the lines of did they realise the door was open, the children were alone etc and were told yes and to mind our own bliddy business and to leave their house. So there! we werent invited again, but thats fine because the children were never left again. So some poeple do think its ok initially until the obvious is pointed out.

I dont think DW was the odd one out. I would gladly have taken my mother anywhere with me, and not to look after the children. She was great company and everyone liked her, and if she wanted she could go and do her own thing, so i dont thing the age thing runs here; and why would she babysit children outside the family??

IVF is available freely although there are lots of Fertility Clinics that seem to have longevity and are costly, so whilst i dont think that was the idea, there could be something in them all wanting to do something privately together and to look at what was involved, as for swinging, if theyre all consenting adults, and the children are well looked after i dont care where they swing, who with or where from.