Anyone who's remotely interested – my [url=http://thevoluptuousmanifesto.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-mail-convert-and-their-attack-on.htmlextended thoughts here.[/url

I thought he had a mandarin up his ar[is[/ie but it could've been another Chinese bloke

from the mirror.

Your point is?

I don't think he has one on this subject.
Or he thinks he does but missed the actual point that the OP was making.

In other news AN Wilson has gone on record confirming that his 'lovely' views were exactly how they seem.

One of the most jaw-droppingly staggering things Wilson claimed was that: "Those six children, burnt to a cinder for nothing, were, in a way, the children of those benevolent human beings who, all those years ago, created our state benefits system.”

That’s right: the deaths can all, ultimately, be placed at the doors of the likes of Beveridge and Atlee, the founding fathers of the modern welfare state, which was a vast part of the post-war settlement.

It takes something to come up with drivel like that. Mind, Wilson also toed the [iMail[/i's line on the Hilary Mantel lecture recently. So we can choose between whether he's nowhere near as bright as he likes to portray himself (Rugby and Oxford, doncha know) or he is deliberately prepared to contort and distort things to suit his – and/or his paymasters' – ideology. By which logic, if I had any issue with people selling sex, I'd call him a whore.

Still, I look forward to him applying his own logic and claiming that Jimmy Savile was "a product of" Catholicism.

i'm just wondering who this 'jeremy kyle' generation is? and how many of them are there?
do those benefit recipients who commit crimes "rake it in"?
how did they report the lifestyle of the mother of 11 who's also "raking it in"?

we'd be much better of discussing why he only got one life term, he killed 6 kids, so he should have 6 life terms running concurrently, as should the other two, they will be out in around 8 years, which disgusts me.

his motivation may have been to "reclaim" his benefits that he "lost" because the kids where in their mothers custody, but that is a far cry from it being the systems fault for "creating" him.

And this is the biggest problem with UC, it goes direct to the claimant, in "cash", to spend as they please (rent will not be their first priority in a lot of cases). Benefits should be paid in vouchers (and you'd get a significant discount if you told Asda et al that they where the preferred supplier). Or maybe a combination of vouchers and cash.

And on the £53 a week issue (because, to be honest, I can't be bothered to post on two threads about practically the same thing), can we see that guy's E&E sheet, see what he actually pays for with his benefit/income and what he takes as granted.

The system is screwed, and none of our current politicians seem to be offering a viable alternatve.

Sad state of affairs that there is so little personal responsibility in society today that people who get paid benefits for rent will not just hand it over to their landlord, but spend it on something else and build up rent arrears.

A few years back my sister-in-laws then partner was a HGV driver. A prostitute had been found dead in a layby & the police had interviewed all of the truck drivers who were in the area at the time. A few weeks later the police rang & asked if they could interview him again. They said they had some new information & the suspect may have had a tattoo on his arm. He said they were welcome to come & interview him & asked if they had a physical description of him on their records. "No" was the reply. "I have tattoos all the way up both arms" he explained "I have tattoos on my chest, back & neck, I have several piercings in my ears, nose & face, a goatee beard & a long ginger mohican...I am DISTINCTIVE". They didn't bother interviewing him again.

Well, the thread was started yesterday, before sentencing.

And was triggered by the imbecilic coverage from a certain rag.

I was disgusted, although not surprised to see that snivelling little [is[/ihit Osborne also jumping on the "benefits culture" bandwagon. It's obviously a calculated risk, hoping to mitigate his slashing of benefits to the most vulnerable in our society by hinting at some causal link. I just hope the whole thing blows up in his pallid, podgy 'Pilsbury Doughboy' face

As well as the scum claiming benefits for most of his life, the taxpayer now has to foot the bill of keeping him in a cell for the rest of his days.

By the time he snuffs it he will have probably cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds and killed 6 children.

Give him the chair and be done with it.

I predict that he won't last too long in whichever prison he spends his time.

You are a complete and utter loon. Prime Daily Wail material, there's no wonder you ended up a tory-supporting imbecile

Which bit do you disagree with?

Or is it only politicians you like to abuse, not child killers.

Strange bitter old man.

Let's get this straight: I mainly abuse only tory politicians and those thick enough to support them.

Strangely enough, I am quite content that justice has been done. Philpott will serve at least 15 years, there could be an argument for a whole-life sentence but 15 years for manslaughter is at the top end of any scale.

You do seem to have a problem with the British legal system and would obviously prefer your own brand of pitchfork justice.

[url=https://mobile.twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/319911411570597889/photo/1Osborne's attitude to the disabled[/url

I'm not content at all. A 'disturbingly dangerous man' with 'no moral compass'.

No issue whatsoever with the state putting this man to death. Complete waste of space. If that makes me an 'imbecile' so be it. I bet there are quite a few imbeciles out there tonight.

There is no such thing as the British Legal System.

The fact that there are more imbeciles like you who would willingly abandon law just to satisfy some blood-lust by proxy, is completely immaterial.

We may not have a "British Legal System" (your caps, not mine) but I am glad that English Common Law cannot be usurped at the whim of some vociferous idiots like you.

Quite apart from the fact that we abolished the death penalty decades ago, how would you suggest the state decide who does or does not get "put to death"?

You want someone executed for manslaughter?

Why does Osborne have such a problem following the rules? Does he think they don't apply to him? Since he's abusing them I propose all Conservatives should be banned from using a car.

what rules did he not follow?

Parked his car in a disabled space this time. Following the example set by Mr Osborne and the Conservative Party on welfare, I feel mass punishment is necessary. So all Tories shouldn't be allowed to use a car. The nation can't afford it and the system has been abused so much it needs urgent reform.

He parked his car? He was driving?