Email to the Missing People Charity

kitti wrote:

whatsupdoc wrote:I read the Terms & Conditions of the Missing People website yesterday and it did say they would delete any offensive comments on any social platforms and ban posters.

That was put on AFTER they wiped off the complaints.

kathybelle wrote:I've also received the same reply as "Quickfinger" and I have now replied to Marting Houghton-Brown. Here is my email.....

Dear Mr Haughton-Brown

To say I am disgusted by your reply to my email, is an understatement. I now understand, why you think the infamous child neglector Kate McCann, is a wise choice as an ambassador for your charity and it is money. You know that the McCanns, received buckets full of cash, from hardworking people, pensioners, children who sent their pocket money as well as wealthy people. The McCanns begged for money and pledged that the money would be used for the sole purpose of finding Madeleine, when in fact, hardly any of the money has been used to search for her.

The majority of the money has been spent on the McCanns failed lawsuits, paying the wages of the people who were supposed to look for her, the inflated wage of Clarence Mitchell and propping up the finances of the McCanns and their wider family. As well as other people who like the McCanns and their wider family, have never looked for Madeleine.

Your charity, along with help from the infamous child neglector Kate McCann, will now be using these poor children and vulnerable adults as cash cows. I would love to know, how much money will actually be spent on looking for thse people and how much will be going into the pockets, of those who won't be lifting a finger to find them. How much money will the infamous child neglector Kate McCann receive, for standing in front of posters?

I remember the person who tried to emmulate the behaviour of the infamous child neglector Kate McCann and her equally infamous child neglecting husband Gerry. However, where the McCanns were successful the woman failed. The woman? Karen Matthews. If Karen Matthews had managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the police, would she now be standing alonside the infamous child neglector, Kate McCann?

In my opinion, your charity is on a downward spiral, now you have employed the infamous child neglector Kate McCann. Your charity will never get one penny from me and if I have my way, no one will ever donate to your charity. Your charity has shown how low it will stoop, in their quest to get money.

Yours sincerely

__________________________________________________

Interlocuter, I'm presuming you are lurking on here, under an assumed name or as a guest. I just want to let you know, that I'll be waiting with baited breath, to see what comments you have to make about the above post. On your website "Madeleine-Exposing the Myths." However make sure that whatever you write are facts, you made a holy show of yourself when you tried to rewrite history. The facts are in the PJ files, fiction is in the heads of yourself and the other McCann supporters. Do you get my drift?

I've got an even better suggestion, why not make your comments on here? You know it makes sense.

margaret wrote:

kathybelle wrote:I've also received the same reply as "Quickfinger" and I have now replied to Marting Houghton-Brown. Here is my email.....

Dear Mr Haughton-Brown

To say I am disgusted by your reply to my email, is an understatement. I now understand, why you think the infamous child neglector Kate McCann, is a wise choice as an ambassador for your charity and it is money. You know that the McCanns, received buckets full of cash, from hardworking people, pensioners, children who sent their pocket money as well as wealthy people. The McCanns begged for money and pledged that the money would be used for the sole purpose of finding Madeleine, when in fact, hardly any of the money has been used to search for her.

The majority of the money has been spent on the McCanns failed lawsuits, paying the wages of the people who were supposed to look for her, the inflated wage of Clarence Mitchell and propping up the finances of the McCanns and their wider family. As well as other people who like the McCanns and their wider family, have never looked for Madeleine.

Your charity, along with help from the infamous child neglector Kate McCann, will now be using these poor children and vulnerable adults as cash cows. I would love to know, how much money will actually be spent on looking for thse people and how much will be going into the pockets, of those who won't be lifting a finger to find them. How much money will the infamous child neglector Kate McCann receive, for standing in front of posters?

I remember the person who tried to emmulate the behaviour of the infamous child neglector Kate McCann and her equally infamous child neglecting husband Gerry. However, where the McCanns were successful the woman failed. The woman? Karen Matthews. If Karen Matthews had managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the police, would she now be standing alonside the infamous child neglector, Kate McCann?

In my opinion, your charity is on a downward spiral, now you have employed the infamous child neglector Kate McCann. Your charity will never get one penny from me and if I have my way, no one will ever donate to your charity. Your charity has shown how low it will stoop, in their quest to get money.

Yours sincerely

__________________________________________________

Interlocuter, I'm presuming you are lurking on here, under an assumed name or as a guest. I just want to let you know, that I'll be waiting with baited breath, to see what comments you have to make about the above post. On your website "Madeleine-Exposing the Myths." However make sure that whatever you write are facts, you made a holy show of yourself when you tried to rewrite history. The facts are in the PJ files, fiction is in the heads of yourself and the other McCann supporters. Do you get my drift?

I've got an even better suggestion, why not make your comments on here? You know it makes sense.

Ouch kathybelle, that's told him. Remind me never to get on the wrong side of you.

cherry1 wrote:Interlocuter - Not hard to work out who that is!

There are people on here who post on the abuse sites supporting the Mccanns.

kathybelle wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Interlocuter - Not hard to work out who that is!

There are people on here who post on the abuse sites supporting the Mccanns.

Cherry

I've just had a look on the Madeleine - Exposing the Myths website and right at the bottom of the page, are the names of a number of posters from here given to Interlocuter by none other than Snowflake, there's a surprise (not). Interlocuter is also quoting posts made by some of these posters.

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/

Maybe the moderator can have a look at the articles at the bottom of the page, to see if this kind of behaviour is acceptable.

It might be better to read the thread which is dated the 4th of July 2012. The name of the thread is "Stuck in a Fog of 2007" The thread is about halfway down the page.

AnnaEsse wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Interlocuter - Not hard to work out who that is!

There are people on here who post on the abuse sites supporting the Mccanns.

Cherry

I've just had a look on the Madeleine - Exposing the Myths website and right at the bottom of the page, are the names of a number of posters from here given to Interlocuter by none other than Snowflake, there's a surprise (not). Interlocuter is also quoting posts made by some of these posters.

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/

Maybe the moderator can have a look at the articles at the bottom of the page, to see if this kind of behaviour is acceptable.

It might be better to read the thread which is dated the 4th of July 2012. The name of the thread is "Stuck in a Fog of 2007" The thread is about halfway down the page.

Snowflake wouldn't need to give names because they've just been reading the topics that are accessible to non-members.

James wrote:Well done to those who have already contacted Missing people re Kate McCann's appointment.

the chairman of the Board of Directors is John Reiss and i suggest that members might like to write to him at the company registered office

Roebuck House
284 Upper Richmond Road west
London SW14 7JE

asking that the Board discuss this appointment at its next meeting in the context of public disquiet.

I think that a hard copy letter would have more impact than an email.

The Chairman could also be told that you are writing to their corporate sponsors saying how concerned you are. According to their accounts filed in company House the sponsors are

Big Lottery Fund
BBC Children in need
Esmee Fairburn Foundation
Rayne Foundation
Oak Foundation
ICAP
Peoples Postcode Lottery
Home office (gave £150,000 in 2010/11)
Department of Education (£400,000 over 2 years)

I think Missing people would be very concerned if the public was expressing concern with their sponsors.

kathybelle wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Interlocuter - Not hard to work out who that is!

There are people on here who post on the abuse sites supporting the Mccanns.

Cherry

I've just had a look on the Madeleine - Exposing the Myths website and right at the bottom of the page, are the names of a number of posters from here given to Interlocuter by none other than Snowflake, there's a surprise (not). Interlocuter is also quoting posts made by some of these posters.

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/

Maybe the moderator can have a look at the articles at the bottom of the page, to see if this kind of behaviour is acceptable.

It might be better to read the thread which is dated the 4th of July 2012. The name of the thread is "Stuck in a Fog of 2007" The thread is about halfway down the page.

Snowflake wouldn't need to give names because they've just been reading the topics that are accessible to non-members.

I'm aware that this facility is accessible to non-members. However, Snowflake did mentioned the names of 9 posters from here, including you and I, when she made this statement "It is terribly sad that the likes of (the names of 9 posters) have the capacity to not look for the name of a missing child simply because they obsessively hate that child's parents.

I've never said I hate the McCanns and to my knowledge, none of the other named posters, or anyone else has said they hate the McCanns.

cherry1 wrote:I have never said I wouldnt look for Madeleine or that I hate the Mccanns. (I dont hate the Mccanns and I dont hate anyone!). Defamation of character, causing undue distress to posters for posting information that the pros disagree with = contravention of the Malicious Communications Act. Fill in online report at Crimestoppers and the information about their sites will be forwarded to the Police, or people can report direct to the Police if they wish.

I understand that some of the Mccann supporters who are posting this kind of abuse against posters who dont believe the abduction story are already being monitored. One point they fail to accept is that the majority of police officers who any of us have spoken to have all said the mccanns are lying!

At Missing People we offer a non-judgementalsupport for all those who are missing and their families. We have never, andwill never enter into unhelpful speculation.

LJC wrote:

At Missing People we offer a non-judgementalsupport for all those who are missing and their families. We have never, andwill never enter into unhelpful speculation.

Hang on a minute, I think they have been very judgemental. They have judged that Madeleine McCann has been abducted by a stranger. And they have judged that Kate McCann is an understanding victim. They say they do not enter into unhelpful speculation, but they must have speculated that this was an abduction. If they have not speculated accordingly then surely they are saying that despite the lengths someone may have gone to, to cause their child to go missing, so long as they understand how it feels to be the parent of a missing child, then they qualify to be an ambassador. My God, social services will have a very long list of parents who have caused their children to go missing. Many of these parents are now very remorseful about their actions and understand what it is like to be without their child. Why didn't they just scour this list for a suitable person to head their charity? Oh, silly me, they are not media savvy like Kate McCann. That's the truth of it I think.

Actually, I think Kate McCann standing in front of a poster of another child is a distraction. People will be distracted by Kate McCann's expression on her face rather than studying the face of the missing child.

It will be a double-whammy. Less money for the charity and less noticing the posters. But more notice taken of Kate. Well, at least Kate will be happy with that. Normal service resumed. Kate takes centre stage again.

kathybelle wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

cherry1 wrote:Interlocuter - Not hard to work out who that is!

There are people on here who post on the abuse sites supporting the Mccanns.

Cherry

I've just had a look on the Madeleine - Exposing the Myths website and right at the bottom of the page, are the names of a number of posters from here given to Interlocuter by none other than Snowflake, there's a surprise (not). Interlocuter is also quoting posts made by some of these posters.

http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/

Maybe the moderator can have a look at the articles at the bottom of the page, to see if this kind of behaviour is acceptable.

It might be better to read the thread which is dated the 4th of July 2012. The name of the thread is "Stuck in a Fog of 2007" The thread is about halfway down the page.

Snowflake wouldn't need to give names because they've just been reading the topics that are accessible to non-members.

I'm aware that this facility is accessible to non-members. However, Snowflake did mentioned the names of 9 posters from here, including you and I, when she made this statement "It is terribly sad that the likes of (the names of 9 posters) have the capacity to not look for the name of a missing child simply because they obsessively hate that child's parents.

I've never said I hate the McCanns and to my knowledge, none of the other named posters, or anyone else has said they hate the McCanns.

hobnob wrote:I haven't even warranted a reply, methinks i shall be making a few phone calls