Evil savage Kirkwood found with dogs again (despite ban)

Is anyone surprised?

Wicked Jeremiah and his equally wicked family were not punished for their appalling animal cruelty when sentenced in 2014 (we do not consider suspended sentences punishment) and they left the Court gloating and every bit as dangerous as before they were caught.

Kirkwood was found with two dogs at his home this week despite a 10 year ban on owning dogs!

It is unclear if the dogs were removed from the premises, and, if not, why not?

Why would the authorities leave dogs with that savage family?

Kirkwood and sons should have gone to prison for 10 years and been banned from owning dogs for life.

However, it seems that in liberal Northern Ireland, the maximum sentence they could have received is two years. That is not justice but they didn’t even get that. The Judge handed down suspended sentences.

It beggars belief!

See article below and you will be confronted with the face of evil.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/the-smirking-thug-behind-notorious-cruelty-case-that-shocked-ni-found-keeping-dogs-despite-ban-35055335.html

37 thoughts on “Evil savage Kirkwood found with dogs again (despite ban)

  1. I think you pair should be prosecuted. Never in my life have I experienced such hatred from a couple of so called christians. I suggest you have a read at your bible. This is not what god intended for you to do.

    • You worship a “god” who is a figment of your imagination. You do not worship the God of the Bible. We do read the Bible and it is in the Bible that we read words like “evil” and “wicked” and “sin.” We hate evil because God hates evil. The Bible says “Ye that love the LORD hate evil.” The Kirkwoods are evil. You think we should be prosecuted for telling the truth and you have no condemnation for those wretched animal abusers. Shame on you.

    • We do not believe that God created evil. We believe that evil is in the world because Adam and Eve sinned and every human being born into the world since has sinned and done evil. However, whilst sin is sin, some sins are more serious than others e.g a child who steals a pencil is a thief but is obviously not in the same category as serial killers or animal abusers like the Kirkwoods.

  2. The Kirkwoods are all guilty, you can see Cathy Kirkwood laughing leaving court. She’s no angel. She knew, such a pity that the UVF still keeps this family safe after renouncing violence after signing gfa!

    • We were and are opposed to the Belfast Agreement because we believe it rewarded and appeased terrorists, republican and loyalist. The UVF has supposedly renounced violence yet they remain a violent and dangerous terrorist organisation and they dominate and terrorise many loyalist communities. If as you say, they (UVF) are protecting the cruel barbaric Kirkwoods, that does not surprise us because birds of a feather flock together. It is disturbing to think that the Kirkwoods may have escaped justice because the local “heavies” (UVF) flexed their muscles and perhaps even issued threats against the forces of law and order. Anything is possible in “appeasement-process” Northern Ireland.

  3. Stop trying to talk sense Ger, that has no place on these pages!? Clearly Evil is not created by God, it is a product of the Devil sent to test us all – you know, like Fossils, Science and Facts

          • Its your response to issues that can be amusing, crow-barring Bible verses into arguments to sort an agenda and ignoring the many contradictions that that can spew up. For the record I actually quite agree with you on the animal cruelty issue for the most part (who would have though it – 1st time!?)…

  4. I completely agree that the punishment for this pair’s horrible cruelty was insufficient and that it is now only right that suspended sentence be revisited and their access to any and all animals for life be completely taken from them.
    Cruelty to animals is the most obvious sign of a horrid heart.

    However, all that being said, I do agree that the writer or writers of this blog come across as thoroughly unChristian in most other posts, effectively amounting to a pious and sanctimonious, judging cruelty towards humanity and certainly not evident of the love of Jesus and his key commandment.

    • Oh dear, here we go again. Another lecture from a lovey-dovey, “judge not” “Christian” who thinks that calling for the death penalty for murderers and abortionists, and long sentences for animal abusers etc is “thoroughly unchristian.”
      We have heard it all before and are weary of such foolish people and such attitudes.
      Do you not realise that the Lord Jesus Christ is the God of the Old and New Testaments and that the stern penalties for crimes/sins mentioned in the Old Testament came from Him and the death penalty is carried over from the Old Testament to the New as is the condemnation of adultery and homosexuality to name but two.
      How dare you say that we are “judging cruelty” towards humanity. Oh how foolish you are! Can you not see that it is our concern for the safety of human beings (including unborn children) that drives us to call for the reintroduction of the death penalty and similar harsh sentences for other offenders from whom we are all in danger.

  5. The Peace Process was a long and drawn out complicated Process that did much to end the killing in Northern Ireland. Clearly that fact means little to you… So if you are opposed to the Peace Process, then what should have been done to end the killing in Northern Ireland? Because what was taking place before the Peace Process was not working at ALL… So what would you have done if the Ball had been in your Court Mr and Mrs White?

    • We would have re-introduced the death penalty and we would have used the SAS regularly to hunt down the terrorists (loyalist and republican) and bring them to justice. We would have given the Police the authority to wage war against the murderous terrorists. They would not have had to fight terrorism with one hand behind their backs (so to speak.)
      We do not believe in rewarding evildoers. We strongly advocate the punishment of evildoers. However, in fighting terrorism, the security forces must not break the law nor allow others to do so (informers, for example.) No-one is above the law. All are subject to it.

          • It is true – you cannot be pro-life and pro-death sentence/execution. There is an inherent hypocrisy there.

            Life in prison for serious crimes, yes – but who are we to judge otherwise?

            As for your solution for Northern Ireland, yes, I’m sure that would drastically have helped improved history(!!!)

            Too many from on-high pronouncements on this blog, not enough thought or decency or rational argument.

            The great thing about humanity is being human! Try it, Mrs White.

          • You complain about us making “on-high pronouncements” on our blog then you make comments that are full of “pronouncements,” but not the “on-high” variety, more the “scraping the barrel” type.
            How dare you say that there is not enough decency on our blog. We are very concerned with decency and propriety and even when writing about the immorality so prevalent in society, we select our words very carefully and NEVER resort to crudeness or indecency and, far from being deficient in “rational argument,” we believe our writing shows phenomenal clarity and insight and analytic skill, and all that requires tremendous powers of thought and reason.
            We are not going to waste our time trying to convince you that there is nothing hypocritical in being pro-life AND pro-death sentence.

      • By what you have just suggested, you have literally meant that you would have brought Northern Ireland to an even more Hellish and Brutal War than what was happening. Loads more innocent People would lose their lives, it would be a Civil War, totally brutal and you claim to be “Pro-Life”?? And you honestly believe that your “God” would be looking down on you and smiling?? Are you seriously that blind to your own obvious hypocrisy?? It beggars belief.

        • Terrorists were responsible for most of the deaths in Northern Ireland. There were some “bad apples” in the security forces but such were the exception and they were also wicked. Your comment makes no sense. How do you deduce that even more lives would have been lost as a result of our policies when said policies advocated hunting down the “victim-makers? Your comment “beggars belief!”

          • With respect my Comment makes perfect sense… by saying you would “re-introduce the death penalty” and use the” SAS to hunt down the terrorists” and “the Police the authority to wage war against the murderous terrorists” you would literally bring Northern Ireland to the level that Syria is in Today, with literally hundreds of innocent People being killed more so than there were during the Troubles. That is what would happen if you had your way Mrs White.

          • We have permitted your comment although we do not agree with it in any way and totally reject your analysis of what would have happened if our policies were carried out in Northern Ireland.

  6. It’s very telling that when you hear the word “decency” your mind leaps to things such as nudity and sexual immorality. “Decent” is actually not a direct opposite of “indecent” and most people realise this. Your blog is one long bitter condemnation of virtually everybody (including most evangelical Christians) and Leroy above is right, a case-study of mental disturbance. You stood for Parliament and then spent most of that time complaining if people asked you difficult questions or challenged you in any way, that’s not a sign of a balanced person.

    • What are you talking about? Name one time when I refused to answer “difficult” questions or complained about being asked to answer such? The West Tyrone Decides debate in April 2015 is a case in point, during which, far from refusing to answer difficult questions, my answers were crystal clear and unambiguous (and courageous in view of the (mostly) hostile audience) and no-one was left wondering what my views were about this or that subject.

      • This is what I mean, you going on about how hostile the audience was. Politicians (any stripe) have to be able to cope with all kinds of opinions being fired at them, and you are extremely poor at this. It seems you can’t go on a radio phone-in either without shouting other people down. Am thinking esp of the phone-in about women in the military: the compere had to remind you that other folk are entitled to disagree! You’re unambiguous alright: you are a shameless bigot. I do wonder how you got to be this way, frankly.

        • Describe a “shameless bigot.” You state that I am “extremely poor” at coping with all kinds of opinions being fired at me. Oh dear and there I was thinking that I stood my ground in every interview/debate in which I participated!!!
          I think I will re-post a link on our blog today to the West Tyrone Decides debate so people can see how “extremely poor” I am in coping with all kinds of opinions being fired at me (tongue firmly in cheek.)

  7. “..and no-one was left wondering what my views were about this or that subject.”

    Indeed. And not to put too fine a point on it, but that, in a nutshell, is why you were not elected.

    Agree with the comment on the definition of decency. As it was described above, the writer clearly means it in the sense of “decency towards fellow human beings” – this blog is literally devoid of compassion or caring and the “pronouncements from on high” are very much that.

    But not in any way which would elicit agreement from any right-minded reader.

    • What do you mean by the words “right-minded reader?” Do you mean “right” as opposed to “wrong” or “right” as opposed to “left” i.e right-wing as opposed to “left-wing?” Or do you mean someone who is in their “right-mind” as opposed to someone who is “out of their mind?” Ah questions, questions! You see Sir, we do have a sense of humour. Imagine that, the Whites actually have a sense of humour. Yes, and great compassion also, for the murdered unborn babies, for the victims of terrorists, for tortured animals……You do us a disservice Sir.

  8. You may be right about the sense of humour. There’s the glint of a joke there, yes!

    Look, I’m not trying to be too hard on you, but it isn’t (always) the message you write which falters, but the harsh tone you use to address it.

    Like so many Evsngelical street preachers who fail to get their message across to the masses who just walk on by, a shift in tone might bring you greater understanding from readers.

    Sticking to bonkers ideas like “adulterers and homosexuals must go to prison” and reclassifying as crimes in this day and ages simply makes your more solid arguments (preventing animal cruelty being one) get completely washed away amid the fire and brimstone.

    We’re all only on this earth for a short period – it is worthwhile we leave a decent legacy behind, not bile, anger and hate.

    I don’t think you two are hateful people – but some of the blog posts are just that.

    It really is all in the tone and trying not to be (too) judgemental. I’m sure you’ll find a good balance to tailor your message to an audience who will instead listen with more opening ears.

    God bless,
    Andrew

    • Kindly name our blog posts that you consider “hateful.” You state that it is “bonkers” to call for the imprisonment of adulterers and homosexuals, so it necessarily follows that you think that Northern Ireland was “bonkers” prior to 1982 when homosexuality was decriminalised and that 21 States in the USA are “bonkers” because they view adultery as an offence punishable by imprisonment or fines or both! In the business world, there are penalties for “breaches of contract” and adultery certainly breaches the contract of marriage (we prefer the word “covenant”.) We will not be changing our tone in our posts in any way but will continue to post the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God.

  9. “..so it necessarily follows that you think that Northern Ireland was “bonkers” prior to 1982 when homosexuality was decriminalised and that 21 States in the USA are “bonkers” because they view adultery as an offence punishable by imprisonment or fines or both!”

    Are there any examples of those adultery laws actually practiced today? A law unenforced (and unenforceable) is no law. Likewise, for homosexuality, yes, NI law was indeed “bonkers” prior to 1982, just as it is now. Same-sex marriage will, in time, also become legal. The current situation, with NINdiffereing from the rest of the UK (not quite “United”) is also quite incredible and farcical.

    “In the business world, there are penalties for “breaches of contract” and adultery certainly breaches the contract of marriage (we prefer the word “covenant”.)”

    You would condone the continuation of a marriage where one spouse is living in fear of their husband/wife, suffering domestic abuse or an unhappy union? Alas, life is not always so idyllic that all marriages can last, despite the couple’s best intentions. It cannot be unlawful for an unhappy, impossible situation to be ended.

    You miss the point on tone and approach, sadly. If you cannot see hatred, judgemental condemnation and indecency towards your fellow humans in the vast majority of your posts, then I cannot help you.

    Do continue to speak the truth – I would never wish otherwise – but remember, it is your truth as you see and interpret it, and it differs greatly to the views of many righteous, loving Christians who will drop by.

    God bless,
    Andrew

    • The laws against adultery in 21 States in the USA are, regrettably, rarely enforced. Note the word “rarely” not “never.” Those laws should be enforced in every case of adultery and adulterers should go to prison. You seem to think that we want people to stay in abusive marriages and that we are totally against divorce. Where did you get that idea and why are you bringing up abusive marriages? The subject under discussion was adultery and the imprisonment of adulterers. We believe that a spouse who is betrayed by an adulterer has the right to divorce and we further believe that a spouse who fears for his or her life because of domestic violence should separate from the offender and perhaps divorce him or her.
      We know that there are many unhappy marriages and they are not all unhappy because of adultery or violence. We live in a fallen world and there are no perfect marriages. Still we believe that marriage is an honourable estate but not one that is to be entered into lightly and, when we speak of marriage, we mean marriage between a man and a woman. Two men and two women can never marry. When a man and woman marry, they must take their vows seriously and be faithful to each other and protect their marriage from those who would threaten it. They must expect temptation which lurks around every corner and they must flee from it.

  10. “In the business world, there are penalties for “breaches of contract” and adultery certainly breaches the contract of marriage (we prefer the word “covenant”.)”

    If adultery breaches the contract, so can many other elements. You imply the penalty is because of the breach. I was responding by pointing out numerous other elements (including unhappy marriages and domestic abuse) can likewise nullify the “contract”.

    The argument for adultery being a criminal offence is no more sound than one for homosexuality or blasphemy. It isn’t workable not correct in the modern world. It may not even have been so in the ancient world. You’ll recall Jesus said that he who was without sin should only cast the stone upon the prostitute. And not one person did.

    As for marriage between a man and a woman only – yes, I suppose “Biblical marriage” remains this. Actual marriage to the public in many countries today, including the UK, now embraces man plus man and woman plus woman within that definition of actual marriage.

    • The Lord Jesus can read men’s hearts and He knew that the men who wanted to stone the woman who was caught in the very act of adultery were hypocrites and probably adulterers themselves because the Lord had earlier taught that if a man so much as looks at a woman with lust, he has already committed adultery with her in his heart. The Lord Jesus is the God of the Old and New Testament and that means that He gave the Ten Commandments to Moses plus all the other laws such as the death penalty for murder, adultery and homosexuality etc. He could have ordered the woman to be stoned to death but His point likely was that her accusers deserved to be stoned to death also. We believe that today, the death penalty is only for the crime of murder. However because homosexuality and adultery were in the same category as murder in the Old Testament, they are still crimes as well as sins and that is why they should be illegal and punished by a prison sentence.

  11. You say you reject my analysis of what would have happened if your policies were carried out in Northern Ireland, thankfully we’ll never know, but I firmly believe it would. One more thing I will add if I may, you say you would bring back the Death Penalty for Murderers, including Terrorism… Let me put this to you, what if someone is executed, and then later on its discovered that they were innocent?? If Policies similar to yours were implemented years ago, then that fate could have happened to 3 very well known cases of Wrongful Conviction that happened in the 70s to some People from Northern Ireland.. I don’t think I need to mention them, I’m sure you know who I’m referring to? Indeed one of them was told by their Judge that he would have had no problem carrying out the death penalty if he’d been found guilty of “Treason against the crown”.. and the Guy was innocent…….What is your opinion of that?

    • If there is any doubt about an individual’s guilt, they should not be executed. We advocate the death penalty in cases of murder where there is no doubting or denying the person’s guilt. We do not want any innocent people executed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s