(UK) Man loses 5 of his kids in a fire

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Read back there for a start and kindly point out where i personally called out for Shameless Mick and his cohorts to die.:rolleyes: They should be locked away for as long as they are breathing so they can think every day of the monstrous act of crime they committed.
Also if the death penalty was an option by law in the case how could it be classed as vigilante justice? Read back on the history of your home nation of England and you will find that the hangmen were always paid very well to do a dirty job and went about their business with no issue.

Now if the death penalty was a viable option in this case i would go for the lethal injection as the means of making sure the accused slipped out of this life with as much dignity as possible in the situation.

I also put it to you that you seem to suffer from sever physiological issues concerning the views of other people on justice which leads to you building up fantasy thoughts on the views of other people. You should really get that checked out if it is preventing you sleep at night.

You've inferred I'm not man enough because I don't buy into your bloodlust. A bloodlust that you may or may not want to carry out for

a) your idea of justice
b) money

Make your mind up. It's either about the justice or a chance to make a fast buck.

As for a "physiological" issue concerning justice? I have no idea what on earth that means. For me, justice does not mean a baying mob, death threats and personal attacks simply because I don't participate in the bloodlust.

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

It seems you lacked any male role models in your life which is sad for you but no reason to sneer at posters who have had a role model willing to show them right from wrong.

I was replying to the poster when he said "you must have very little in your life to cause you to be such a small petty man".

It's a classic attack, I've been round enough to see it every so often. You're small, you're mad, you're stupid, you're on drugs and so and so forth.

The poster belittled my life and defined what it is to be a "real man".

All because I question the death penalty, the hysterical shrieking for vengeance and the lumping in of benefits claimants into one nasty group, Osborne style.

I know what's right and what's wrong. Wishing death upon people is wrong. Tarring a whole group of people with the same brush is wrong.

old hippy

allibastor wrote: »

Yes, old hippy I would carry out their execution. If you can prove to me who is better of with them living and taking money from a stretched system to keep then locked up then I might change my mind, but they killed six kids to try and get custody of five more so they could get more benefits.

So, I have to be like a jury to save them from your impending death sentence?

6 people were murdered and it's going to be made all better by you murdering another 3?

HondaSami

I started to read about this monster in yesterday's paper and decided no after reading he planned to rape his wife on his children's grave, how sick is that man, he did not care for his children and he deserves no sympathy or mercy imo.

Grand Moff Tarkin

old hippy wrote: »

You've inferred I'm not man enough because I don't buy into your bloodlust. A bloodlust that you may or may not want to carry out for

a) your idea of justice
b) money

Make your mind up. It's either about the justice or a chance to make a fast buck.

As for a "physiological" issue concerning justice? I have no idea what on earth that means. For me, justice does not mean a baying mob, death threats and personal attacks simply because I don't participate in the bloodlust.

You are a piece of work and thank f**k most normal sane people do not buy into your attitude. As for my "blood lust" again point out where i am calling for their heads on a pike in this thread? That said if the legal option was there to end their lives i would not think twice about doing it as it would rid the earth of scum who put the lives of children ahead of a desire for cold hard cash. In fact i would do in for NOTHING. My point about cash which you tried to twist into a comment about making a "fast buck" was that any person in the line of work as an executioner should be well paid for having to dispose of the vermin of society. Time and again you have been exposed in this thread as a person who is willing to get nasty when people do not share your views.

SEPT 23 1989

HondaSami wrote: »

I started to read about this monster in yesterday's paper and decided no after reading he planned to rape his wife on his children's grave, how sick is that man, he did not care for his children and he deserves no sympathy or mercy imo.

mother of jaysus:mad:

Lisha

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

mother of jaysus:mad:

He actually phrased it that they would rape each other.
He is such a sick fuuck that he even has to reduce sex to rape.

As for the mail blaming benifit culture. Not a hope he did what he did cos he was evil from day one.
It boggles me that he could seemingly charm people into helping him? Seriously how?

All I can hope is that the surviving kids get help to reach their full potential .
They should really get new ids. Hard to see how they can have a normal life when people will forever associate them with that evil scumbag

Airitech

old hippy wrote: »

I was replying to the poster when he said "you must have very little in your life to cause you to be such a small petty man".

It's a classic attack, I've been round enough to see it every so often. You're small, you're mad, you're stupid, you're on drugs and so and so forth.

The poster belittled my life and defined what it is to be a "real man".

All because I question the death penalty, the hysterical shrieking for vengeance and the lumping in of benefits claimants into one nasty group, Osborne style.

I know what's right and what's wrong. Wishing death upon people is wrong. Tarring a whole group of people with the same brush is wrong.

I said you were a small petty man because you were using these deaths as an excuse to have a go at gay marriage opponents and Daily Mail readers, small petty behaviour in my book.

People are angry and calling for this guys head but how long has that been going on over different issues? It's called venting and given the particularly callous nature of these crimes I'd wouldn't challenge people on it this time.

It has never changed anything and never will. If you read my posts I'm opposed to it but I can see why people get that angry.

You seem to have some problem with masculinity. You said you'd like to see men emasculated. I don't know why men intimidate you, but there is no need to try to weaken all men so you'll feel better.

Do you have some kind of inferiority complex, are you not assertive or feel you lack physical presence or something?

I gave a few examples of traits I feel command respect in a man, you are trying to misrepresent that as some kind of rules you need to follow to be a real man.

If you want to debate this further PM me and I'll be happy to oblige, no point dragging this further off topic.

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

As for my "blood lust" again point out where i am calling for their heads on a pike in this thread? That said if the legal option was there to end their lives i would not think twice about doing it as it would rid the earth of scum who put the lives of children ahead of a desire for cold hard cash. In fact i would do in for NOTHING. .

Well, that makes it all clear now :rolleyes:

Yes, I really am a piece of work for not being into revenge fantasies.

old hippy

Airitech wrote: »

I said you were a small petty man because you were using these deaths as an excuse to have a go at gay marriage opponents and Daily Mail readers, small petty behaviour in my book.

People are angry and calling for this guys head but how long has that been going on over different issues? It's called venting and given the particularly callous nature of these crimes I'd wouldn't challenge people on it this time.

It has never changed anything and never will. If you read my posts I'm opposed to it but I can see why people get that angry.

You seem to have some problem with masculinity. You said you'd like to see men emasculated. I don't know why men intimidate you, but there is no need to try to weaken all men so you'll feel better.

Do you have some kind of inferiority complex, are you not assertive or feel you lack physical presence or something?

I gave a few examples of traits I feel command respect in a man, you are trying to misrepresent that as some kind of rules you need to follow to be a real man.

If you want to debate this further PM me and I'll be happy to oblige, no point dragging this further off topic.

When you've finished flexing your muscles, perhaps you could give us your opinions on George Osborne, seeing as how he's being petty, capitalising on the murders to have a go at people on benefits?

smurgen

HondaSami wrote: »

I started to read about this monster in yesterday's paper and decided no after reading he planned to rape his wife on his children's grave, how sick is that man, he did not care for his children and he deserves no sympathy or mercy imo.

read that too,worst ever like!I'm gonna have to stop reading newspapers because all this sort of sh1t is doing nothing for my blood pressure or mental health.

old hippy

smurgen wrote: »

read that too,worst ever like!I'm gonna have to stop reading newspapers because all this sort of sh1t is doing nothing for my blood pressure or mental health.

Don't believe all you read in the papers. Or on boards, for that matter.

Airitech

old hippy wrote: »

When you've finished flexing your muscles, perhaps you could give us your opinions on George Osborne, seeing as how he's being petty, capitalising on the murders to have a go at people on benefits?

That's what I mean, I must be "flexing my muscles" if I don't agree with emasculating men. You really don't seem to understand how someone can be comfortable with masculinity. Seriously if you want to debate this more use PM.

On George Osbourne, he is a political opportunist. He has reforms he has to make and there is now the appetite among a large part of the electorate for swift harsh cuts. Mick Phillpott is a strawman he is using and his crimes make it seem wrong to oppose it.

Osbourne will try to capitalise on the momentum generated by people's anger to achieve big savings in a short time. It's all misrepresentation though and the tabloids are his best ally in it. The Daily Mail are leading the way in this, explicitly saying that the welfare state created a finiancial incentive for Phillpott to do what he did.

Osbourne wants to use a broadsword instead of a scalpel, sweeping cuts affecting everyone on benefits instead of precise targeting of anomalies like Phillpott.

The anger will die down soon and when people realise that Osbourne intends to impact deserving welfare recipients he won't get away with it. The momentum he is riding is not going to last long enough for him to push through the reforms he wants.

Grand Moff Tarkin

old hippy wrote: »

Well, that makes it all clear now :rolleyes:

Yes, I really am a piece of work for not being into revenge fantasies.

You are the only one who brings up the term "revenge fantasies" which is very strange if i am to be honest and you should really seek help about such an issue.

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

You are the only one who brings up the term "revenge fantasies" which is very strange if i am to be honest and you should really seek help about such an issue.

I refer you to your denials on having a bloodlust:

"i would not think twice about doing it as it would rid the earth of scum who put the lives of children ahead of a desire for cold hard cash. In fact i would do in for NOTHING. ."

Help me, Obi Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope :rolleyes:

Grand Moff Tarkin

old hippy wrote: »

I refer you to your denials on having a bloodlust:

"i would not think twice about doing it as it would rid the earth of scum who put the lives of children ahead of a desire for cold hard cash. In fact i would do in for NOTHING. ."

Help me, Obi Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope :rolleyes:

In context with the last few posts before that you asked would anyone on here be willing to act as executor to the three who committed the crime.
Offering to do a dirty job hardly means i lie in bed at night planning to do away with the scum in jail.

You really are clutching at straws now and have been shown up big time in this thread and a lot more poster now see you for what you are so my work here is well and truly done.

old hippy

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

In context with the last few posts before that you asked would anyone on here be willing to act as executor to the three who committed the crime.
Offering to do a dirty job hardly means i lie in bed at night planning to do away with the scum in jail.

You really are clutching at straws now and have been shown up big time in this thread and a lot more poster now see you for what you are so my work here is well and truly done.

Yes, you've shown how you don't have a bloodlust but you'd rid the world of them for the sake of
a) justice
b) money
c) for free
d) the hell of it
e) because I'm worth it

Well done, you. Showing me up and all

watch this , its just so sad , so tragic

Grand Moff Tarkin

old hippy wrote: »

Yes, you've shown how you don't have a bloodlust but you'd rid the world of them for the sake of
a) justice
b) money
c) for free
d) the hell of it
e) because I'm worth it

Well done, you. Showing me up and all

Five different points scrapped together from all my posts in the thread. Well done you.

allibastor

Can't post replys on mobile for some reason. In response to old hippy hippy shake.

The jury returned a guilty verdict on the philpotts and had very solid evidence to show how the fire was started, etc. they have recorded conversations of them saying to stick to the story and showing no regard for the children. The joy of modern forensics is that it forms a fact base case which is hard to place blame elsewhere. As said before, you have not said once why we are better off with them alive, you just attacked my point if view

wordsmithi

The real man debate whatever it means does show one thing i.e. Mick Philpott isn't one.

How can an unemployed/unemployable middle aged man who hasn't the ability to wash himself for three months, whose biggest idea was to burn his home when his kids are asleep upstairs,he has an attempted murder conviction etc be anything other than a total disaster case.

Airitech

wordsmithi wrote: »

The real man debate whatever it means does show one thing i.e. Mick Philpott isn't one.

How can an unemployed/unemployable middle aged man who hasn't the ability to wash himself for three months, whose biggest idea was to burn his home when his kids are asleep upstairs,he has an attempted murder conviction etc be anything other than a total disaster case.

+1 that was the point when that debate started. It shouldn't ever be acceptable in any part of society for a man (or woman) to lead that kind of lifestyle.

sid waddell

It seems Mick Philpott was a Tory voter.

Will we now see the Daily Mail running a front page splash blaming the Tories for his arson?

Do you think the Tories' culture of personal greed and picking on the weak and vulnerable led Philpott to do what he did?

It certainly seems a lot more logical to me than a pathetic, bogus, lying campaign of demonisation by a right-wing rag against people on benefits, most of whom are probably harder working than the cossetted, protected, bloated, fat cat, Tory-voting elite.

goat2

was it said on the news that mick pilpotts two partners were not allowed the keys to the home, and that he had all the state benefits that were doled out the family put into his own account only,
he must have ruled that home with an oiron fist,
i also wonder did he, charge for the services he was allowing his wife to give other males, or was she doing it under threat from him,

he was one piece of ****e, living off the hard working people of his country

LordSutch

Osborne is dead right.

Madam_X

LordSutch wrote: »

Osborne is dead right.

Not to use this tragedy/atrocity as a political football, no.

And someone who thinks he is needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

LordSutch

Madam_X wrote: »

Not to use this tragedy/atrocity as a political football, no.

And someone who thinks he is needs to take a long hard look at themselves.

I mean people like Philpotts milking the system for all its worth, surely that is wrong! and on that point I think Osborne is totally correct.

Sky Sports package, two washing machines, multiple holidays, all the best & most expensive toys for the kids, etc etc

Don't know what you mean by the 2nd point?

IzzyWizzy

LordSutch wrote: »

I mean people like Philpotts milking the system for all its worth, surely that is wrong! and on that point I think Osborne is totally correct.

Sky Sports package, two washing machines, multiple holidays, all the best & most expensive toys for the kids, etc etc

Don't know what you mean by the 2nd point?

It's incredibly tacky and inappropriate to use the deaths of 6 innocent children to back up your political point. Yes, the Philpotts abused the benefits system. What has that got to do with the price of fish, really? Osborne just conveniently used this whole mess to further his own agenda, which is to make the British public ostracise anyone on benefits.

Paramite Pie

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

I think you would find no shortage of people who would be willing to apply for such a role. Just because you lack the stomach for handing out justice do not think that there are people who would be willing to fill the role.

Maybe you should move to Saudi Arabia. They do the whole eye for an eye thing over there. You might get a 'nice' job dealing justice.

Have you read the thread about the Saudi man sentenced to paralysis? It's very easy to think people should deserve those kinds of sentences until someone actually gets that type of punishment.

That being said, I'd have no sympathy for this man if he were killed. I just don't necessarily think the death penalty is ever a good idea.

LordSutch

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

It's incredibly tacky and inappropriate to use the deaths of 6 innocent children to back up your political point.

I concede and agree that if you (and Madam_x) look at it like that, well then Osborne was out of order!

I do however think that the whole benefit system needs to be looked at in the UK (re the very OTT Philpott benefit lifestyle), which was milking
the system for all its worth, but yes, on reflection the Chancellor might have chosen another time to bring this to political hot potato to the fore.