So it was Beth Twitty

[petals]

It appeared to me that they were not trying to investigate anything. It was damage control. They were worried about tourism, not finding Natalee.

Who is "they?" Debardeleben and Ennis?

j2k

J2K were responsible for investigating? J2K were more worried about tourism? That doesn't make sense.

[cajun_mali]

J2K were responsible for investigating? J2K were more worried about tourism? That doesn't make sense.

ALE????

Where did the quotecome from?

[resigned]

ALE????

Where did the quotecome from?

The comment was made by Mitch Ennis to Greta on the interview snip that you posted - Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:02 pm (page 7 of this thread). There was a line gap before that last sentence which might have given the impression that you were making a seperate comment if one didn't bother to check the link.

[FloridaDoug]

1) It's pretty bad when we try to rationalize why they didn't search.

2) The ulimate truth, no matter what we believe or all that's been written, we simply don't know.

1) Explain not rationalize. And why is it bad?

2) That can be said of everything we discuss

!) If don't know the facts, it's a rationalization.

2) No. We know j2k were never brought to court, nor even formally charged, for any crime. We know j2k told a lie. We know there were minor differences amoung the 20 or so signed and unsigned statements. We know a lot, but most don't go to the central question of what happened to Natalee.

1) Or an explaination

2) That we simply do not know can be said of everything we discuss -- except for trivial or obvious facts

[cajun_mali]

1) Or an explaination

2) That we simply do not know can be said of everything we discuss -- except for trivial or obvious facts

It's trivial that they lied? It kept J in jail for months.

[cajun_mali]

The comment was made by Mitch Ennis to Greta on the interview snip that you posted - Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:02 pm (page 7 of this thread). There was a line gap before that last sentence which might have given the impression that you were making a seperate comment if one didn't bother to check the link.

Thank you. I cut and pasted from another thread. You're a kinda "do your homework" person.

VAN SUSTEREN: Who are they, the police? Do you the police?

ENNIS: This is really the odd thing. The police are supposed to be investigating Natalee's disappearance. But they told us in the meeting that the investigation, the people in charge of it, was the Aruban tourism department, which I thought was a little bit strange.

It appeared to me that they were not trying to investigate anything. It was damage control. They were worried about tourism, not finding Natalee.
VAN SUSTEREN: Mitch, this is the first time I am hearing that the tourism was involved, and that's particularly interesting to me. Did they say anything else about the tourism division at any time to either one of you?

[resigned]

Thank you. I cut and pasted from another thread. You're a kinda "do your homework" person.

You are welcome I didn't have a problem understanding it. And yes - iquitos had posted it first on that same thread a few posts before you cut and pasted it.

I just was tired of the J2K?? What??? ALE?? What?? Where?? and thought I'd clear up where the "quote" came from.

[FloridaDoug]

1) Or an explaination

2) That we simply do not know can be said of everything we discuss -- except for trivial or obvious facts

1) It's trivial that they lied?

2) It kept J in jail for months.

1) It is obvious they lied

2) Yes, and that is also obvious

[plhtx1]

Do you know who was on that FIRST (of many) McWane planes to/from Aruba?

Why wouldn't he be on that plane with Jug?

I will look further when I have some time...

Charles was not on the plane with Jug and Beth on May 30.

[plhtx1]

Charles was not on the plane with Jug and Beth on May 30.

This was in response to WOW's post:

You sure about that?

plhtx1 wrote:


He is an atty. He's the one that got the Twitty's hooked up with the Souza woman, right away. Guess you could call it some kind of roleplay. Maybe, he was just advising his best friend with what he knew. Nothing sinister as everyone thinks. He was on that plane as Jug's best friend.

What the heck?

I never posted the statements that I put in red! [/b]

[yankee-in-france]

This was in response to WOW's post:

You sure about that?

plhtx1 wrote:


He is an atty. He's the one that got the Twitty's hooked up with the Souza woman, right away. Guess you could call it some kind of roleplay. Maybe, he was just advising his best friend with what he knew. Nothing sinister as everyone thinks. He was on that plane as Jug's best friend

What the heck?

I never posted the statements in red! [/b]

Hopefully this is now correct.

[plhtx1]

OK, they're not in red any longer.

I posted them in red because those are not my words. I never said those last comments that WOW said I said.

[plhtx1]

The following were not my words, WoW, as put in your post of August 11, 2009:

"Guess you could call it some kind of roleplay. Maybe, he was just advising his best friend with what he knew. Nothing sinister as everyone thinks. He was on that plane as Jug's best friend"


These are not my words, WOW.

Edited a bit (to make clearer) by YIF.

[yankee-in-france]

I posted them in red because those are not my words. I never said those last comments that WOW said I said.

OK, PM me the words that need to be deleted and I will remove them. Sorry, Plhtx1, I misunderstood.

[Bongo]

Aiii ......me no understand no more.