Where is MAURA MURRAY

Judged:

4

sophie bean wrote:

I wouldn't for a moment question that some of my posts have sounded and in fact been angry. There has been a "theory" implied that there's a "lot of traffic between western MA colleges and the White Mountain big resort hotels.
I wanted to know what this was supposed to mean.
If you read the MMM forum, you will find a post by EagleArt/claysoup which makes that assumption and includes a specific reference to the kind of connetion between the two locations. I repeatedly asked EA what s/he meant to present as a theory as to why that's important and what it has to do with Maura.
EA has yet to post either answer, although the implication if you read the post in question is clear.
When I see any "theory" which is nothing more than an attempt to attack Maura's character in some way (which many of us would not even consider to be grounds for thinking any less of her!)- I become angry. The implication that I see, not stated openly or honestly, is that her "lifestyle" somehow caused her to go missing.
I'm absolutely baffled by anyone not understanding why that makes me angry. She's not here to "defend" herself (as if her character needed defending?). Attacks and insinuations about her personal life all lead far, far, far away from the possibility of a crime that wasn't "caused" by her "lifestyle."
NH LE attacked Maura's character by insisting throughout the media on the imaginary role of alcohol in her disappearance. Why did they do that? Could it be to cover up their own guilt and negligence?
Do you understand why I find any "inquiring minds wanna know" questions about Maura's character and "lifestyle" suspicious?

Judged:

1

1

1

sophie bean wrote:

I wouldn't for a moment question that some of my posts have sounded and in fact been angry. There has been a "theory" implied that there's a "lot of traffic between western MA colleges and the White Mountain big resort hotels.
I wanted to know what this was supposed to mean.
If you read the MMM forum, you will find a post by EagleArt/claysoup which makes that assumption and includes a specific reference to the kind of connetion between the two locations. I repeatedly asked EA what s/he meant to present as a theory as to why that's important and what it has to do with Maura.
EA has yet to post either answer, although the implication if you read the post in question is clear.
When I see any "theory" which is nothing more than an attempt to attack Maura's character in some way (which many of us would not even consider to be grounds for thinking any less of her!)- I become angry. The implication that I see, not stated openly or honestly, is that her "lifestyle" somehow caused her to go missing.
I'm absolutely baffled by anyone not understanding why that makes me angry. She's not here to "defend" herself (as if her character needed defending?). Attacks and insinuations about her personal life all lead far, far, far away from the possibility of a crime that wasn't "caused" by her "lifestyle."
NH LE attacked Maura's character by insisting throughout the media on the imaginary role of alcohol in her disappearance. Why did they do that? Could it be to cover up their own guilt and negligence?
Do you understand why I find any "inquiring minds wanna know" questions about Maura's character and "lifestyle" suspicious?

Judged:

1

claysoup wrote:

I have never attacked Maura's character or implied that she is responsible for her own abduction - assuming she was, in fact, abducted. There is no kind of "lifestyle," preference, or orientation that I find offensive or immoral unless it's used for immoral purposes. For example, if your lifestyle involves French kissing chickens in a graveyard at midnight, that's your business. But if your "lifestyle" is one of robbing banks, then I have a problem it. Kissing chickens is a non-issue. Robbing banks is a very big issue.

Judged:

2

2

OH MY wrote:

<quoted text>
It infurioraits me to see posts from Skye and CM and thier friends throwing disinformation in here!!!!!!!
We know who you are so leave ok!

claysoup wrote:

I think it would be great if all posters could offer their thoughts about Maura's disappearance freely and openly. However, there's a big difference between, on the one hand, constructive disagreement with another poster’s opinions and, on the other hand, attacking another poster simply because he or she holds those opinions. Any effort made to silence or chase off people who are honestly trying to discuss this case should be viewed as nothing more than an attempt to conceal the truth. Shutting people up has never uncovered the truth. An open mind has nothing to hide and nothing to fear - except attack by the guilty.

claysoup wrote:

Could Maura's car have been running so badly that, perhaps not far from Amherst, one or two women who were headed to roughly the same area as Maura offered to follow her north in case of engine failure? Could Maura's car have finally broken down in Haverhill and they gave her a ride and dropped her off somewhere, never knowing that she disappeared that night? If they could still be tracked down, would they recall where they dropped her off?

LAJFA wrote:

Time to take a step back. I do not see how this forum is productive at this point and time. Also, I do not agree with all posts nor do I need to. Each of us is entitled to our own opinion.
Take care all.......

interested in truth wrote:

OH MY,
Stand strong because I believe in you.....I am sorry if it seems you are being attacked by some bloggers. Just because you do not go the route others think you should does not mean that you are wrong. Without a doubt I do believe others are trying to throw some stuff out there to distort and divert the attention from themselves.

claysoup wrote:

I have never attacked Maura's character or implied that she is responsible for her own abduction - assuming she was, in fact, abducted. There is no kind of "lifestyle," preference, or orientation that I find offensive or immoral unless it's used for immoral purposes. For example, if your lifestyle involves French kissing chickens in a graveyard at midnight, that's your business. But if your "lifestyle" is one of robbing banks, then I have a problem it. Kissing chickens is a non-issue. Robbing banks is a very big issue.

quija wrote:

OH MY, a while ago here were you talking about maybe Maura's car was up in NH before the night she disappeared?

Judged:

1

1

1

sophie bean wrote:

OH MY, are you accusing me of something? You'd better come out and say it if you are. I have spent three years trying to help find Maura and what happened to her.
Re "attacks":
Claysoup/Eagle Art was "attacked" on MMM when s/he posted an extremely cryptic post about "western MA colleges and big resort hotels in Bethlehem NH" - no one knew what s/he meant, and I ASKED. I have yet to hear a "theory"

evolve from this obtuse post.
It is ever so easy to say "oh! when I am disagreed with or asked a question I feel ATTACKED! You must NEVER ask me a question or disagree with me!!!I will be deeply offended and wounded!!!"
What a pity.
It's ALMOST a foolproof way to stop discussion dead in its tracks, but I can see it for the manipulation that it is, and find it far more damaging to discussion than asking for clarification. How silly of me.
It won't work. We will keep digging until we find what happened to Maura. Whatever tactic is thrown at us, we'll just keep coming. Get used to it, we're not going away until we get the answers that Maura's family needs, the answers that will lead us to Maura.

interested in truth wrote:

OH MY,
Stand strong because I believe in you.....I am sorry if it seems you are being attacked by some bloggers. Just because you do not go the route others think you should does not mean that you are wrong. Without a doubt I do believe others are trying to throw some stuff out there to distort and divert the attention from themselves.