Telford suicide: Thousands sign petition demanding police arrest sick mob who urged tragic man to jump

First topic message reminder :

Almost 5,000 have already signed the petition, calling for action against members of the crowd who even took selfies moments before the tragic man plunged to his death

Thousands are signing a petition demanding that police identify and prosecute those who encouraged a suicidal man to jump to his death from a multi-storey car park.

Shocking reports emerged yesterday of crowds taunting the man who was threatening to jump from a shopping centre's car park, with police condemning their behaviour.

The unnamed man, understood to be in his 40s, stood for more than two hours from the high distance on Saturday as members of the crowd filmed the harrowing incident on their phones, with some even taking selfies.

Police witnessed the shocking behaviour at the the busy Southwater shopping centre in Telford, Shropshire, at around 1pm.

Specialist negotiators were even deployed in an attempt to talk him down, but he jumped to his death from the car park at 3.40pm

Taunts shouted at the tragic victim included "Get on with it", "Go on, jump," and some even chanting: "How far can you bounce?".

But now almost 5,000 have signed a petition demanding police action.

The petition, set up yesterday by local Ceri Ransome, reads: "We the undersigned request that West Mercia Police take immediate action to find, arrest and charge the people who encouraged a man to jump to his death from a multi storey building in Telford on Saturday 14th March 2015.

"The family deserve this justice and the people of Telford want these people to be held accountable for their vile behaviour and complete lack of compassion.

"This petition also appeals to the Shropshire Star to name and shame these people. Our thoughts and condolences are with the family and friends of the man concerned at this sad time."

Police have since confirmed that they will seek to identify offenders who taunted him and arrest them.

Mark O’Connor, a detective sergeant for West Mercia police, said: “We do not condone such behaviour, and would hope that the local community would work with our officers to provide information regarding those who committed the cruel taunts.

"This was clearly someone who was in need of support.

“In response to the activity on social media, the origin of any comments or material that is deemed to be unlawful will be investigated and appropriate police action will be taken against any identified individual.

"I would urge that any person who is in possession of any related material does not publish it any further and ensures it is disposed of.”

One witness to the horrific incident, Chloe Jones, told the BBC: "As we walked past, there were some youths shouting ‘Go on, do it – jump’.

“It made me feel quite sick, actually, and then a lot of them were filming it, but to see some grown men filming it … I just said to them ‘What on earth are you going to do with that footage? Are you going to home and watch it if that poor man jumps?’”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/telford-suicide-thousands-sign-petition-5347573

How can people DO that!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Poor man must have been in a terrible state, how can people not feel for him and egg him on. Disgusting cretins, hope they get locked away.

Amazing, all those people who screamed blue murder about pictures of children maimed in Gaza haven't said a word about this, I wonder why.

And Quill will do his normal, of when he realises people think what he said was appalling, instead of saying sorry, will either bluster and divert, or try and ignore it and hope it will go away. bless.

Sassi wrote:Not one person was defending war, who would.

This is the voice of the war monger, who wants to deflect the point.  YES, IN FACT, YOU ARE DEFENDING WAR!  Can I make it any clearer?

How stupid do you think we are?  How stupid are you?  If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's a fookin' duck, stupid!  The military is what you glorify, death is what you sanction.

Sassi, your position is really to preserve a little space of the violence for your side...that doesn't make you less of a warmonger.  The only reason you repeatedly parade out these bloody baby pictures, is your side is losing.  That is merely situational.  What is permanent is your dedication to the process that led to all that bloodshed.  If those were Jewish babies, you would be standing there right alongside of nicko.  

Anyone who applauds soldiers, with all their velcro and medals and gee-gaw, is applauding war.  Don't sit by the side of the parade, clapping your hands, and tell us...Oh, I'm really against all this.  That's the very epitome of a liar.

Original Quill wrote:

Sassi wrote:Not one person was defending war, who would.

This is the voice of the war monger, who wants to deflect the point.  YES, IN FACT, YOU ARE DEFENDING WAR!  Can I make it any clearer?

How stupid do you think we are?  How stupid are you?  If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's a fookin' duck, stupid!  The military is what you glorify, death is what you sanction.

Sassi, your position is really to preserve a little space of the violence for your side...that doesn't make you less of a warmonger.  The only reason you repeatedly parade out these bloody baby pictures, is your side is losing.  That is merely situational.  What is permanent is your dedication to the process that led to all that bloodshed.  If those were Jewish babies, you would be standing there right alongside of nicko.  

Anyone who applauds soldiers, with all their velcro and medals and gee-gaw, is applauding war.  Don't sit by the said of the parade, clapping your hands, and tell us...Oh, I'm really against all this.  That's the very epitome of a liar.

What a load of bollocks.
Grow some backbone and apologise Quill.
Again war is a natural ratrional need when faced when agression, you are clueless to think otherwise and war is needed then to stop people commiting attocities onto others.
What you are stating is to sit back and allow violence which is worse than an aggressive tyrant starting a conflict intent to wipe out people.
You have no leg to stand on and why nobody in their right sane mind would back your pacifist stance.
Even Ghandi would not have succeed against an undemocratic Britain, if it had been a dictatoship, he would have been executed along with any supporters. This is why you fail to factor in when a war is nescessity. Unless you think your life is of no worth.
Basically you are showing dishonour to countless millions that have given their lives, I think you need to reign your neck in and realise you are talking utter bollocks
Again man up and apologise to Nicko, if you have anyu common decency in you.

Brasidas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No it wasn't.  He is a war monger.  So is sassi...and now it appears you are, too.

When are you people going to realize that you are killing real, live human beings?  Sassy is forever posting the pictures of bloody babies, but she would be cheering if they were Israeli babies.  Another war-monger, a different colored stripe down her back.

You want to honor soldiers, get them the fook out of harm's way, you silly cow.  Practical.  Simple.  No need for medals and jangles.  These idiots hang a bunch of balmy, colored and striped ribbons on their chests, wear silly hats with cottage cheese on the beaks, and snap to a salute, and think they are anything more than the criminals who stalk the streets at night, selling drugs and killing people in drive-bys?  I have absolutely no respect for them.  What did we see in the last war: kidnapping, child-rape, torture, and murder...and you think that is worthy of some ribbon on some grunt's chest??

Those who glorify war, killing, rape and torture, have no business demanding respect.  I see some polished military marching band in a parade, and I wonder how many little daughters did those pretty boys rape the other day.  You?  You don't even put two and two together.  Those are rapists, kidnappers and torturers you wish to honor.  Boolshit!

The point you seem to be missing is that if we did not go to war with agressors then this pictures would still be there without the war due to those who commit attrocities on people, or did this not excape your attention.

Oh, okay…so you are saying y'all just wanted to join in the fun?  Because, you can’t argue that you made things better, can you?

Brasidas wrote:The fact is many who serve  conflicts are rightly seen as brave and rewarded as brave with recognition of their actions, becuase they place their lives at daily risk in such actions. Your argument is idiotic beyond belief because you are making an argument which states there is never a justification for war.

And you got a master’s degree?  Your reasoning sucks.  A soldier is sent to kill; he kills; and he is rewarded for bravery??  And I’m supposed to applaud?  Because they “place their lives at daily risk?”  

Therefore, everyone who drives a vehicle should get rewarded…for placing “their lives at daily risk” on the highway.  I’ve got a better idea.  Let’s keep those soldiers home, let them get jobs and pay to support their families.  Raise the GNP.  Avoid the ridiculous national debt.  Invest the money in our future.  And then spend the money on social programs that benefit all human beings around the world.  

We could even give shiny medals to $100 dollar bills and hang them in trophy cabinets at City Hall. Better than pictures of dead sons and daughters.

Brasidas wrote:You are wrong because there is, as the natural rational thing for a human to do is to defend itself against an aggressor.

You see, I’ve gotta problem right here.  Neither Syria nor ISI ever invaded the shores of North America.  Neither did Saddam Hussein.  Nor for that matter did Vietnam or North Korea.  Or Cuba, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Somolia, Haiti or Bosnia…WTF were we doing all the way over there?  Who exactly was the aggressor in those situations?  Please be precise, because right there I’m having difficulty following you in this nonsense.

Brasidas wrote:You will find no ethical argument to claim not to and to claim someone can run away is also moot based on the point you will soon run out of places to hide. If the natural rational thing to do is to stop an aggressor then this calls to take action by war. Nobody is claiming all wars are right but many who fight in them are brave, no matter the side they are on, the major point of which eludes you Quill.

Right!  We just had to go kill all those poor souls.  God forbid that we might spend less money feeding them, housing them, tending to their health needs, or making conditions better…Chrissakes, that would be socialism!  Indeed, let’s spend $17-trillion and go kill those heathens.

Brasidas wrote:The reality is you are basically saying we should do away with Remeberance sunday and that we should not honour those who have fallen, you sound as bad as some Muslim extremists that burn poppies. This is why you will find not many people are going to ever agree with you here because you think you have some higher moral argument. You do not, as the protection of sanctity of life will supercede any inaction against aggresssors.

What I am saying is you don’t glorify criminal behavior.  War is criminal behavior.  You might as well hang a medal on Charles Manson.

Brasidas wrote:What you said was poor and you know it, you crossed a line on taking the piss. I can understand we all get carried away but do the decent thing and swallow some pride and apologise to Nicko, as your words were unwarranted.
Be a man and man up.

You are being stupid and nauseous and it's embarrassing me.  You are responding to cold logic and reason with some kind of religious sermon.  Yet you claim you are not religious.   Give me the answer to that one.

In fact, give me any answers.  Because I can find no sense in what you are saying.  You are simply wrapped up in the convention of it all...let's salute, all the best of society does it.  Or, I think I'll have soup today.  You have no idea why and what you are doing.  It's just...customary to go slap around some half-dressed natives and kill their children.

There you go, proved me right again. More bluster and diversion, this from the man who is always telling us how America saved our arses in WWII and boasting about American aircraft carriers, and drones etc etc.

Oh, and I'm sure you also boasted about a relative of yours in the Navy? Father maybe? Whoever, you definitely spoke about a relative in the Navy. Would you have disrespected him the same way you did Nicko?

Stop lying, stop blustering, stop diverting and just say sorry.

Original Quill wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

The point you seem to be missing is that if we did not go to war with agressors then this pictures would still be there without the war due to those who commit attrocities on people, or did this not excape your attention.

Oh, okay…so you are saying y'all just wanted to join in the fun?  Because, you can’t argue that you made things better, can you?

Brasidas wrote:The fact is many who serve  conflicts are rightly seen as brave and rewarded as brave with recognition of their actions, becuase they place their lives at daily risk in such actions. Your argument is idiotic beyond belief because you are making an argument which states there is never a justification for war.

And you got a master’s degree?  Your reasoning sucks.  A soldier is sent to kill; he kills; and he is rewarded for bravery??  And I’m supposed to applaud?  Because they “place their lives at daily risk?”  

Therefore, everyone who drives a vehicle should get rewarded…for placing “their lives at daily risk” on the highway.  I’ve got a better idea.  Let’s keep those soldiers home, let them get jobs and pay to support their families.  Raise the GNP.  Avoid the ridiculous national debt.  Invest the money in our future.  And then spend the money on social programs that benefit all human beings around the world.  

We could even give shiny medals to $100 dollar bills and hang them in trophy cabinets at City Hall.  Better than pictures of dead sons and daughters.

Brasidas wrote:You are wrong because there is, as the natural rational thing for a human to do is to defend itself against an aggressor.

You see, I’ve gotta problem right here.  Neither Syria nor ISI ever invaded the shores of North America.  Neither did Saddam Hussein.  Nor for that matter did Vietnam or North Korea.  Or Cuba, Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Somolia, Haiti or Bosnia…WTF were we doing all the way over there?  Who exactly was the aggressor in those situations?  Please be precise, because right there I’m having difficulty following you in this nonsense.

Brasidas wrote:You will find no ethical argument to claim not to and to claim someone can run away is also moot based on the point you will soon run out of places to hide. If the natural rational thing to do is to stop an aggressor then this calls to take action by war. Nobody is claiming all wars are right but many who fight in them are brave, no matter the side they are on, the major point of which eludes you Quill.

Right!  We just had to go kill all those poor souls.  God forbid that we might spend less money feeding them, housing them, tending to their health needs, or making conditions better…Chrissakes, that would be socialism!  Indeed, let’s spend $17-trillion and go kill those heathens.

Brasidas wrote:The reality is you are basically saying we should do away with Remeberance sunday and that we should not honour those who have fallen, you sound as bad as some Muslim extremists that burn poppies. This is why you will find not many people are going to ever agree with you here because you think you have some higher moral argument. You do not, as the protection of sanctity of life will supercede any inaction against aggresssors.

What I am saying is you don’t glorify criminal behavior.  War is criminal behavior.  You might as well hang a medal on Charles Manson.

Brasidas wrote:What you said was poor and you know it, you crossed a line on taking the piss. I can understand we all get carried away but do the decent thing and swallow some pride and apologise to Nicko, as your words were unwarranted.
Be a man and man up.

You are being stupid and nauseous and it's embarrassing me.  You are responding to cold logic and reason with some kind of religious sermon.  Yet you claim you are not religious.   Give me the answer to that one.

In fact, give me any answers.  Because I can find no sense in what you are saying.  You are simply wrapped up in the convention of it all...let's salute, all the best of society does it.  Or, I think I'll have soup today.  You have no idea why and what you are doing.  It's just...customary to go slap around some half-dressed natives and kill their children.

Your stupidity knows no limits it seems.
So soldiers only kill do they?
They never are there to protect?
You see you have as much intelligent as a turd Quill on matters you get too emotional on.
You made a right twat of yourself here and again you provide no ethical reason agaisnt where there is a need to go to war, unless you think life is of no importantce.
Next point is even worse you use examples of conglicts that are not examples of what I am speaking of.
Are you that utterly stupid?
Your desperation here is so bad it is based on conflicts I have not stated in regards, agressors.
I am showing you when war is required against agressors.
Seriously, you are embarressing yourself here and all because you have no common decency to admit you were completely rude and what you said was uncalled for.
It shows you are incapable of admitting you are wrong and you would rather continue to make yourself look even more stupid here.
At no point have you countered the reason to go to war against an aggressor.

Now you can bow down with grace or I can continue to make you look very stupid

Your choice.

risingsun wrote:There you go, proved me right again.   More bluster and diversion, this from the man who is always telling us how America saved our arses in WWII and boasting about American aircraft carriers, and drones etc etc.

Oh, and I'm sure you also boasted about a relative of yours in the Navy?  Father maybe?   Whoever, you definitely spoke about a relative in the Navy.  Would you have disrespected him the same way you did Nicko?  

Stop lying, stop blustering, stop diverting and just say sorry.

Sassi, insofar as you have dropped the original discussion and switched to me as a subject, I will assume you have no rejoinder and I will chalk that up as a win.

With you, I'm used to winning. Lol.

I will give you a further example to destroy your view on war.
Without dropping the A-bomb, the predicted casualties for the Japanese population was 20 million if the Allies invaded their homeland.
So what was better here a few hundred thousand dying by dropping an atom bomb or 20 million lives lost through invasion?
Or allow 10 to 30 million more Chinese to die through your inaction?
Are you any good at maths Quill?

Take your time

Original Quill wrote:

risingsun wrote:There you go, proved me right again.   More bluster and diversion, this from the man who is always telling us how America saved our arses in WWII and boasting about American aircraft carriers, and drones etc etc.

Oh, and I'm sure you also boasted about a relative of yours in the Navy?  Father maybe?   Whoever, you definitely spoke about a relative in the Navy.  Would you have disrespected him the same way you did Nicko?  

Stop lying, stop blustering, stop diverting and just say sorry.

Sassi, insofar as you have dropped the original discussion and switched to me as a subject, I will assume you have no rejoinder and I will chalk that up as a win.

With you, I'm used to winning.  Lol.

I think you will find it was you that diverged the debate and attacked Nicko very poorly insulting him in the worst manner possible Quill.
Now I am giving you every chance to save grace here as I have no wish for you to look a mug as I like you, but if you continue to act the fool, then I will treat you as one.
Man up and admit what you said was wrong, otherwise you really are a coward.

Original Quill wrote:

risingsun wrote:There you go, proved me right again.   More bluster and diversion, this from the man who is always telling us how America saved our arses in WWII and boasting about American aircraft carriers, and drones etc etc.

Oh, and I'm sure you also boasted about a relative of yours in the Navy?  Father maybe?   Whoever, you definitely spoke about a relative in the Navy.  Would you have disrespected him the same way you did Nicko?  

Stop lying, stop blustering, stop diverting and just say sorry.

Sassi, insofar as you have dropped the original discussion and switched to me as a subject, I will assume you have no rejoinder and I will chalk that up as a win.

With you, I'm used to winning.  Lol.

Quill, you swerved the original discussion, not me, and you are again blustering and bullshitting to avoid apologising, which is what you always do. And Quill, you have only ever won in your own head, you normally run and avoid, I'm quite surprised you are still posting on this thread from past experience.

Man up and apologise, because you would not have disrespected you relative like that, so it was never about war, it was about you trying to be nasty to Nicko and get away with it.

I'M not too bothered by Quills remarks, after all he's just an ignorant coward. I have an idea if he repeated those remarks at any rememberance ceromany he would suffer severe volence to his person. I would like to know what his age is. He could have been one of the hippy's who stood by and shouted" Baby Killers" at returning soldiers.

Brasidas wrote:I will give you a further example to destroy your view on war.
Without dropping the A-bomb, the predicted casualties for the Japanese population was 20 million if the Allies invaded their homeland.
So what was better here a few hundred thousand dying or 20 million?
Are you any good at maths Quill?

Take your time

No need to take any time. WWII was the last legitimate war in which the US was involved. What was my standard above? Read it again. The shores of this country were attacked. Japan, Pearl Harbor, 8:05 am, Sunday, December 7, 1941. It was the last time America was in the right in a conflict situation.

Like you, didge, and sassi, Japan as a culture was caught up in the glory of war, depravity and destruction. I have said this so often, and I'll will repeat it...Japan had to be taught how to surrender. So shining was their notion of war, that they were willing to kill their lotus flower society in order to glorify it. It took extraordinary measures to snap them out of it. It took extraordinary measures to save their society.

The real lesson in Japan, is: that is you...conservatives, in particular, but as you see, people with special interests in warfare like sassi, as well. The society that exalts death, is on the brink of death itself. I simply don't understand why killing another human being is deserving of such ceremony. It's disgusting. But there it is.

More diversion, you have boasted about the aircraft carriers that the USA have NOW and weaponary they have NOW, so stop, we can all see through it.

Just man up and apologise, it's that easy.

nicko wrote:I'M not too bothered by Quills remarks,  after all he's just an ignorant coward. I have an idea if he repeated those remarks at any rememberance ceromany he would suffer severe volence to his person.  I would like to know what his age is. He could have been one of the hippy's who stood by and shouted"  Baby Killers" at returning soldiers.  

Nicko, I marched against Vietnam, I marched against Iraq, because both of them were just plain wrong. But that isn't the point. He didn't say it because he is against war, as he is always boasting about how America can beat anyone and their weaponary etc, that's just a smokescreen. He said it because he was trying to look big and trying to put you down in any way he could and he crossed the line and is not a big enough person to say so. That simple, that easy, but he will go on blustering. I've known Quill do it so many times and he never apologises, he just blusters, retreats or diverts, it's the Quill way.

Original Quill wrote:

Brasidas wrote:I will give you a further example to destroy your view on war.
Without dropping the A-bomb, the predicted casualties for the Japanese population was 20 million if the Allies invaded their homeland.
So what was better here a few hundred thousand dying or 20 million?
Are you any good at maths Quill?

Take your time

No need to take any time.  WWII was the last legitimate war in which the US was involved.  What was my standard above?  Read it again.  The shores of this country were attacked.  Japan, Pearl Harbor, 8:05 am, Sunday, December 7, 1941.  It was the last time America was in the right in a conflict situation.

Like you, didge, and sassi, Japan as a culture was caught up in the glory of war, depravity and destruction.  I have said this so often, and I'll will repeat it...Japan had to be taught how to surrender.  So shining was their notion of war, that they were willing to kill their lotus flower society in order to glorify it.  It took extraordinary measures to snap them out of it.  It took extraordinary measures to save their society.

The real lesson in Japan, is: that is you...conservatives, in particular, but as you see, people with special interests in warfare like sassi, as well.  The society that exalts death, is on the brink of death itself.  I simply don't understand why killing another human being is deserving of such ceremony.  It's disgusting.  But there it is.

You just defeated your own argument.
A justified war, that was easy and you got there all on your own.
So you owe Nicko a huge apology.

In your own time

nicko wrote:I'M not too bothered by Quills remarks,  after all he's just an ignorant coward. I have an idea if he repeated those remarks at any rememberance ceromany he would suffer severe volence to his person.  I would like to know what his age is. He could have been one of the hippy's who stood by and shouted"  Baby Killers" at returning soldiers.  

I don't really need to respond to stupidity, but occasionally out of the fog a point is raised. Basically, nicko, you are saying that "severe violence" is a moral principle. Because, you reason, violence would be done, therefore that is morality. The theory you are espousing is MIGHT IS RIGHT.

In Plato's Republic, Book I, Thrasymachus (a sophist and rival of Socrates) argues, that might makes right. He says that justice is the advantage of the stronger. But, you have to ask, what is the connection between violence and morality?

The point is important because I believe that this is fundamental to a society which sees warfare as the be all, end all. Note that in all of this discussion, very little, or no attention is paid to who is right. We start out by talking about how someone is the "aggressor" and end up by arguing whether it is right to glorify our worthy warriors because they can bomb the shit out of everyone in sight.

We've missed a whole, necessary part of the conversation, haven't we? Why should we bomb the shit out of everyone? What does "aggressor" mean? When it gets right down to it, might is right. We do these things because we can. There is no discussion of right and wrong...no discussion of cause and effect.

We feel that if we can just beat the shit out of everyone--"would suffer severe volence to his person"--we can make things right. Might is right. Underneath it all, that is the philosophy. We are impatient with cause and effect. We latch onto some mumbo-jumbo about some Wahhibism or other, but only to be able to label some kind of person as the "aggressor" or the bad guy.

Consider this: these situations are like a knot, tied in some rope. We could study the knot, figure out the ins and outs, the loops and cross-overs, and what must be undone in order to untie the knot. Or we could simply each grab an end and pull and pull until the rope breaks. Like Socrates, which alternative feels like justice?

All we are doing...and all our countries are doing, is pulling and pulling until the rope breaks. We don't really care about justice. We don't really care about the bloody babies and weeping mothers. All we care about is the --boom, boom--big noises we can make. That's nicko's answer (doing "violence") to the question. That's the answer of all conservatives to difficult questions.

Think about the 'knot metaphor' the next time you want to discard critical thinking, and go with the boom, boom.

More waffle, more bluster, more diversion.

Smoke and mirrors to avoid


Man up, apologise.

Brasidas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No need to take any time.  WWII was the last legitimate war in which the US was involved.  What was my standard above?  Read it again.  The shores of this country were attacked.  Japan, Pearl Harbor, 8:05 am, Sunday, December 7, 1941.  It was the last time America was in the right in a conflict situation.

Like you, didge, and sassi, Japan as a culture was caught up in the glory of war, depravity and destruction.  I have said this so often, and I'll will repeat it...Japan had to be taught how to surrender.  So shining was their notion of war, that they were willing to kill their lotus flower society in order to glorify it.  It took extraordinary measures to snap them out of it.  It took extraordinary measures to save their society.

The real lesson in Japan, is: that is you...conservatives, in particular, but as you see, people with special interests in warfare like sassi, as well.  The society that exalts death, is on the brink of death itself.  I simply don't understand why killing another human being is deserving of such ceremony.  It's disgusting.  But there it is.

You just defeated your own argument.
A justified war, that was easy and you got there all on your own.
So you owe Nicko a huge apology.

In your own time

What was my standard above? Don't be a fool. Read it.

risingsun wrote:I'm afraid Quill has sucked you in Veya.   Not one person was defending war, who would.  It should be avoided at all costs.  But sometimes, like WWII, and in our case Northern Ireland, when two sides were at each other's throats and innocents are being killed, before you have a peace process, troops have to defend them.  And no, neither am I saying Northern Ireland was right, because many bad things were done,

But you see, Quill very carefully, to take you away from what he actually said, has made you think that we (and it was more than me) were defending war when we got angry with him.  

Let's go back to what he actually said to Nicko:

More and more words, nick. Cleaning latrines, were you? Working the chow line? Your frame of mind is compensatory...something is bothering you. You weren't really there, were you?


The words in bold were the words objected to.   The were deliberately disrespecting the fact that Nicko served in the Forces and trying to belittle him, something Quill always does when he is put on the spot.

We have known Nicko for some time, and although I disagree with him violently about politics, Quill has no right to belittle him for serving his country and cannot see the irony of doing it on a thread about people who were belittling someone else.

The fact that he then came out with all of the above just goes to show he knew how wrong he had been and was trying to deflect further.

+1000

Brasidas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

No it wasn't.  He is a war monger.  So is sassi...and now it appears you are, too.

When are you people going to realize that you are killing real, live human beings?  Sassy is forever posting the pictures of bloody babies, but she would be cheering if they were Israeli babies.  Another war-monger, a different colored stripe down her back.

You want to honor soldiers, get them the fook out of harm's way, you silly cow.  Practical.  Simple.  No need for medals and jangles.  These idiots hang a bunch of balmy, colored and striped ribbons on their chests, wear silly hats with cottage cheese on the beaks, and snap to a salute, and think they are anything more than the criminals who stalk the streets at night, selling drugs and killing people in drive-bys?  I have absolutely no respect for them.  What did we see in the last war: kidnapping, child-rape, torture, and murder...and you think that is worthy of some ribbon on some grunt's chest??

Those who glorify war, killing, rape and torture, have no business demanding respect.  I see some polished military marching band in a parade, and I wonder how many little daughters did those pretty boys rape the other day.  You?  You don't even put two and two together.  Those are rapists, kidnappers and torturers you wish to honor.  Boolshit!

The point you seem to be missing is that if we did not go to war with agressors then this pictures would still be there without the war due to those who commit attrocities on people, or did this not excape your attention.
The fact is many who serve  conflicts are rightly seen as brave and rewarded as brave with recognition of their actions, becuase they place their lives at daily risk in such actions. Your argument is idiotic beyond belief because you are making an argument which states there is never a justification for war.

You are wrong because there is, as the natural rational thing for a human to do is to defend itself against an aggressor. You will find no ethical argument to claim not to and to claim someone can run away is also moot based on the point you will soon run out of places to hide. If the natural rational thing to do is to stop an aggressor then this calls to take action by war. Nobody is claiming all wars are right but many who fight in them are brave, no matter the side they are on, the major point of which eludes you Quill.

The reality is you are basically saying we should do away with Remeberance sunday and that we should not honour those who have fallen, you sound as bad as some Muslim extremists that burn poppies. This is why you will find not many people are going to ever agree with you here because you think you have some higher moral argument. You do not, as the protection of sanctity of life will supercede any inaction against aggresssors.

What you said was poor and you know it, you crossed a line on taking the piss. I can understand we all get carried away but do the decent thing and swallow some pride and apologise to Nicko, as your words were unwarranted.
Be a man and man up.

nail>>>>>>head

Bluster, bluster, waffle, waffle Quill

Smoke and mirrors, diversion, all the normal.

Man up and apologise for saying that Nicko was lying about his Army service.  This has never been about war, and you know it, it was the way you derided what Nicko had done, not your stance against war.  So the rest of your posts are your normal avoidance, and we can all see it.

Again, a reminder of YOUR WORDS Quill:

More and more words, nick. Cleaning latrines, were you? Working the chow line? Your frame of mind is compensatory...something is bothering you. You weren't really there, were you?


None of that is talking about whether war is bad or not, it is simply trying to deride Nicko.

So stop with the smokescreen and man up, if that is possible.

Original Quill wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

You just defeated your own argument.
A justified war, that was easy and you got there all on your own.
So you owe Nicko a huge apology.

In your own time

What was my standard above?  Don't be a fool.  Read it.

You need to read back at your own replies as your argument has changed.
Ity actually conflicts, which is besides the point, most people respect those no matter the cause of the conflict of those who serve as soldiers. The only exception to this, is when soldiers commit attrocities. Hence why you fail to comprehend anything here. Throughout history many people have not even had a choice in the conflicts, does that make them cowards, because they did actually fight and for causes not their own? You see your argument has basically insulted just about every soldier who has served in every conflict. Again there is no repsect for those who commit what we call war crimes, but the many who have fought are shown the greatest respect. Why is this> Because they are placing their lives on the line not for themselves but for others, those around them.
Seriously Quill you need to realize how poor you are being here and over wanting to be right where in fact you are wrong on this.

Anyway its up to you whether you do admit you were wrong here in what you said.
Its not up to me, its down to you, but it is poor showing on your part.

Quill I have heard you may times say that the USA kicked butts and how the USA won the Second World War.....

So I'm kinda going

You BRAG about the USA and how great they are but sit there and say war is bad?

Can you please tell me what a country should do if they are being attacked?

And btw, I'm not an advocate of war, but even I "the silly woman" that I am (your patronising words) realise that country's have to defend themselves.

risingsun wrote:I'm afraid Quill has sucked you in Veya.   Not one person was defending war, who would.  It should be avoided at all costs.  But sometimes, like WWII, and in our case Northern Ireland, when two sides were at each other's throats and innocents are being killed, before you have a peace process, troops have to defend them.  And no, neither am I saying Northern Ireland was right, because many bad things were done,

But you see, Quill very carefully, to take you away from what he actually said, has made you think that we (and it was more than me) were defending war when we got angry with him.  

Let's go back to what he actually said to Nicko:

More and more words, nick. Cleaning latrines, were you? Working the chow line? Your frame of mind is compensatory...something is bothering you. You weren't really there, were you?


The words in bold were the words objected to.   The were deliberately disrespecting the fact that Nicko served in the Forces and trying to belittle him, something Quill always does when he is put on the spot.

We have known Nicko for some time, and although I disagree with him violently about politics, Quill has no right to belittle him for serving his country and cannot see the irony of doing it on a thread about people who were belittling someone else.

The fact that he then came out with all of the above just goes to show he knew how wrong he had been and was trying to deflect further.

well to bring it back to the OP then Since Nicko clearly isn't that worried (strangely enough he is made of sterner stuff than that )

Quill didn't convince him to jump so I guess it is agreed these people should be punished since they did worse.. the most surprising thing is they did it in the flesh, you hear about it online and it is easily imaginable for people disassociate the online personality with a real person but IF you are watching someone standing up on a ledge and still telling them to jump there is something deeply wrong

People encouraging someone to jump to their death is a disgusting example of what people are capable of doing. They're just sick beyond belief.
Weed them out and show their ugly mugs around the nation so that we know who they are.

Disgusting gits.

Irn Bru wrote:People encouraging someone to jump to their death is a disgusting example of what people are capable of doing. They're just sick beyond belief.
Weed them out and show their ugly mugs around the nation so that we know who they are.

Disgusting gits.

I'll make the same point as I did earlier to that Irn....

can you...absolutely...guarantee that no inncoent person ...who may just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time...or even (regrettable as even this is ) rubber necking, will not be wrongfully identifed and subject to "mob rule"

as I said ...like it or not we happen to have laws in this country....throw them overboard for this and you effectively throw them overboard full stop..

Not to mention that even then, those guilty of this are STILL, whilst subject to the law of the land, portected by it as well...they have the right to "due process"

are yuo suggesting that we should chuck that out and allow the outraged citizenry free reign to hang from the most convenient place a shoplifter for instance???

it seems the geniuses also filmed it with their phones shouldn't be too hard to determine the guilty

veya_victaous wrote:it seems the geniuses also filmed it with their phones shouldn't be too hard to determine the guilty

Have we determined what law is at hand?  A petition is a request (for police action), it is not ipso facto law. If there is no law that prohibits anything reported, there is no action the police can take.

According to the BBC article, Det Sgt Mark O'Connor said of film clips that were made by witness' cell phones: "I would urge that any person who is in possession of any related material does not publish it any further and ensures it is disposed of."  http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-31903327

Disposed of?  It doesn't sound as if the police think there is a case to be made. Perhaps it's much ado about nothing.

Original Quill wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:it seems the geniuses also filmed it with their phones shouldn't be too hard to determine the guilty

Have we determined what law is at hand?  A petition is a request, it is not law.

According to the BBC article, Det Sgt Mark O'Connor said of film clips that were made by witness' cell phones: "I would urge that any person who is in possession of any related material does not publish it any further and ensures it is disposed of."  http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-31903327

Disposed of?  It doesn't sound as if the police think there is a case to be made.

Public nuisance
anti social behaviour
Fuck it raid their house you'll find something and the video provides decent suspicion for warrant.
just harass them a bit.
they don't need to go to jail but the cops can always get you for something... worse case plant some weed on them

veya_victaous wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Have we determined what law is at hand?  A petition is a request, it is not law.

According to the BBC article, Det Sgt Mark O'Connor said of film clips that were made by witness' cell phones: "I would urge that any person who is in possession of any related material does not publish it any further and ensures it is disposed of."  http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-31903327

Disposed of?  It doesn't sound as if the police think there is a case to be made.

Public nuisance
anti social behaviour
Fuck it raid their house you'll find something and the video provides decent suspicion for warrant.
just harass them a bit.
they don't need to go to jail but the cops can always get you for something... worse case plant some weed on them

In England...no doubt you are right. They could probably get away with that.

Original Quill wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Have we determined what law is at hand?  A petition is a request, it is not law.

According to the BBC article, Det Sgt Mark O'Connor said of film clips that were made by witness' cell phones: "I would urge that any person who is in possession of any related material does not publish it any further and ensures it is disposed of."  http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-shropshire-31903327

Disposed of?  It doesn't sound as if the police think there is a case to be made.

Public nuisance
anti social behaviour
Fuck it raid their house you'll find something and the video provides decent suspicion for warrant.
just harass them a bit.
they don't need to go to jail but the cops can always get you for something... worse case plant some weed on them

In England...no doubt you are right.  They could probably get away with that.

In the USA ya just shoot'em (particularly if black)

its the UK they prefer to not make a fuss...

Australia they would work out something to fine them for
We get fined for everything

veya_victaous wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

In England...no doubt you are right.  They could probably get away with that.

In the USA ya just shoot'em (particularly if black)

Particularly if it is a southern state. But cops and guns anywhere is a bad combination.

veya_victaous wrote:its the UK they prefer to not make a fuss...

Australia they would work out something to fine them for
We get fined for everything  

It doesn't seem as if the Telford police are too worried about it. In a civilized country you would have to have broken a (preexisting) law in order to be criminally prosecuted. It doesn't sound promising if the cops are telling people to destroy what evidence they do have.

cause that would make a fuss and England prefers to queue...

English cops lining up in a queque...

As distinct from English cops in a chorus line...

Well we see what American cops do, they shoot first and ask questions later, so if the base point is on comparrison of Police forces, the US do not have a leg to stand on.

It's a form of envy didge

eddie wrote:It's a form of envy didge

In every aspect Eddie.
America is in every aspect a young nation founded actually on many British principles, they just do not have our wonderful history and are thus Jealous of this.
What they have is a short history which apart from the two world wars which was great, the rest is not much to write home about.
Put it this way, the disparity in welath between Blacksn and whites in the US today is greater than it ever was under Apartheid South Africa.

Brasidas wrote:

eddie wrote:It's a form of envy didge

In every aspect Eddie.
America is in every aspect a young nation founded actually on many British principles, they just do not have our wonderful history and are thus Jealous of this.
What they have is a short history which apart from the two world wars which was great, the rest is not much to write home about.
Put it this way, the disparity in welath between Blacksn and whites in the US today is greater than it ever was under Apartheid South Africa.

All true. The pic of the policeman on the bike is funny though

Ah, I see Quill did the Quill thing, ran away last night when being asked to apologise and then crept back to post stuff he thought might offend afterwards. Bless him, he really can't take being criticised can he.

Move on for goodness sake, that was yesterday, this is today, no point in dragging out something that people have already spoken out against.

veya_victaous wrote:it seems the geniuses also filmed it with their phones shouldn't be too hard to determine the guilty

Agree Veya, although I would much rather they were prosecuted, because it sends out a better message.

Brasidas wrote:Well we see what American cops do, they shoot first and ask questions later, so if the base point is on comparrison of Police forces, the US do not have a leg to stand on.

You'll get no argument from me. British cops appear to be much more civil. But, then, they keep guns away from them.

Brasidas wrote:

eddie wrote:It's a form of envy didge

In every aspect Eddie.
America is in every aspect a young nation founded actually on many British principles, they just do not have our wonderful history and are thus Jealous of this.
What they have is a short history which apart from the two world wars which was great, the rest is not much to write home about.
Put it this way, the disparity in welath between Blacksn and whites in the US today is greater than it ever was under Apartheid South Africa.

I think, as you point out ("founded actually on many British principles"), American history is essentially British history, with two-hundred short years of physical removal and immigrant admixture.

But the envy that we see with y'all is not over history, but contemporary wealth and power.  No question, neither the British nor the Americans have been very intelligent in their use and enjoyment of wealth and/or power--each in their respective zenith--but that is another matter.  I do agree...the Anglo and American legacies are not great and certainly nothing to write home about.  Greeks, Franks and Romans did better.

But the Lodges don't envy the Lowells for their family histories, but for their wealth and influence.

Original Quill wrote:

Brasidas wrote:

In every aspect Eddie.
America is in every aspect a young nation founded actually on many British principles, they just do not have our wonderful history and are thus Jealous of this.
What they have is a short history which apart from the two world wars which was great, the rest is not much to write home about.
Put it this way, the disparity in welath between Blacksn and whites in the US today is greater than it ever was under Apartheid South Africa.

I think, as you point out ("founded actually on many British principles"), American history is essentially British history, with two-hundred short years of physical removal and immigrant admixture.

But the envy that we see with y'all is not over history, but contemporary wealth and power.  No question, neither the British nor the Americans have been very intelligent in their use and enjoyment of wealth and/or power--each in their respective zenith--but that is another matter.  I do agree...the Anglo and American legacies are not great and certainly nothing to write home about.  Greeks, Franks and Romans did better.

Greeks I would agree with, Romans, technology wise maybe, but certainly not in how they treated people.
Celts get my vote, women had some real equality back then.

Brasidas wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I think, as you point out ("founded actually on many British principles"), American history is essentially British history, with two-hundred short years of physical removal and immigrant admixture.

But the envy that we see with y'all is not over history, but contemporary wealth and power.  No question, neither the British nor the Americans have been very intelligent in their use and enjoyment of wealth and/or power--each in their respective zenith--but that is another matter.  I do agree...the Anglo and American legacies are not great and certainly nothing to write home about.  Greeks, Franks and Romans did better.

Greeks I would agree with, Romans, technology wise maybe, but certainly not in how they treated people.
Celts get my vote, women had some real equality back then.

I admire the Celts most too. But **ahem** I am one. Lol.

risingsun wrote:Ah, I see Quill did the Quill thing, ran away last night when being asked to apologise and then crept back to post stuff he thought might offend afterwards.   Bless him, he really can't take being criticised can he.

Haha...yes, unfortunately, I do have to get some sleep. Do you find it surprising that everyone's life does not revolve around you, sassi? Awwww...po' bebe.