April 10, 2011

The gay lobby continues to undermine the sacrosanct institution of marriage, according to a damning new report by a PR company.

Dichs&Lobley have made the report available to hungry journalists in the past week and are delighted with the coverage.

“We’re very pleased about the exposure we’re getting. We’ve been in the business for years and we know how to play the press. When we were offered a skip-full of cash to promote homophobia, covert racism and general intolerance towards minorities, we were delighted with the opportunity.”


Commenting on the difficulties they had conveying complex ideas to a readership with the mental age of a dead monkey, chief executive of Dichs&Lobley, Tristram Dichs added,

“It very difficult to distil lots of material down to sizes that the average gutter journalist can accommodate. Large passages are usually disappointing and put punters off. Size is important, and knowing when to release: timing is everything.”


Julian Gaggin, spokesgay for gay advocacy group Rings of Ire, says marriage has many benefits which shouldn’t be denied to gays and lesbians:

“For too long we’ve been denied the frisson of adultery. We have to make do with just old-fashioned promiscuity but marriage would open up a whole new world of excitement and moral degradation. Just think of the extra-marital affairs. Sex was starting to get dull for fags, and we’re tired of bareback sex with strangers. Even the monthly HIV test has lost its excitement. We want something new–we want marriage– and it’s a contravention of our rights to deny it.”

“We are also worried that the conservative press might tire of boring stories about cottaging and gay orgies. Gays are secretly worried that the tabs will move on to other outgroups. We’re terrified of the day we wake up and there’s not a single sensationalised story about dirty gays. If we don’t have the right to adultery then it will be Asians making middle England gag on its porridge.”


Felony Milps, of Decent Ordinary Christians Keeping Institutions Not Gay, opined that gays are trying to ruin a millenia-old tradition which has its roots in the inviolable wisdom of some old books.

“There is lots of evidence that gays make bad parents. Marriage must be between a man and a woman because it is the normative coupling in nature and the only one which can produce children into a safe, loving home environment which in turn produces unquestioning Judeo-Christian traditionalists thereby ensuring that normal values are ensured and enshrined in society as they ought to be according to the traditional traditions which have been the bedrock of civilisation and are unalterable and not subject to scrutiny nor any meddling by devious multicultural relativistic liberals who regularly resort to the sneaky tactics like independent thought, reasoning, logic and the wickedness of empirical evidence.”


Ed Todgebury, Conservative MP for Girthing Frockett and Minister for Fairness, has been leading a campaign in the Commons to put an end to homosexual behaviour with the exception of elite private schools.

“It’s alright in the boarding school dorm but when one reaches school-leaving age one must no longer tumesce when one espies the exquisite globularity of a pubescent boy’s bottom.”


Littlejohn gaybashing again

June 1, 2010

Angry Mob has it here…

The moral regression of Melanie Phillips

May 6, 2010

I have read the journalistic nonsense of Melanie Phillips for some years and it continues to surprise me how she actually gets away with it. She is a big fish in the conservative movement but in a riposte to Jonathan Freedland she coyly denied this:

Jonathan justifies his attack by claiming that I have massive influence. Would that it were so! I remain, alas, merely one journalist trying to tell the truth as I see it. Jonathan can breathe easily again.

Whatever the scale of her influence in 2007, and it was big, her influence is indeed massive in 2010: Lecturing widely, contributing to Fox News, a Daily Mail column, blogging at the Spectator, writing for the Jewish Chronicle, appearing on Question Time and BBC 4’s Moral Maze, promoting books–that’s massive. Liberal-minded people must watch with horror as her influence expands and the rhetoric intensifies. This week alone has seen her launch a new book as well as having a cover story in the Spectator.

Her big theme (aside from the Middle East, a subject for another day), abundantly reinforced throughout her writing, is that atheism, rationalism and the like are bad and Judeo-Christian voodoo is actually authentic reason. This is an attempt by one journalist to rewrite three millenia of philosophy. All the brilliant philosophers have been wasting their brains since Christianity because Phillips has figured it all out. Read the rest of this entry »


April 16, 2010

Lucifer’s hideous visage has been seen in satellite imagery over Iceland, prompting fears that Armageddon is imminent. Satan can be clearly seen belching vile ash clouds in an attempt to disrupt aviation.

A crisis meeting of EU leaders was convened at Brussels. Top of the agenda was the motion that God should be written into a new EU constitution. All member states are expected to ratify it.

EU commission president Jose Manuel Barroso conceded that Europe had been heading in the wrong direction, “We have been too liberal. We have forgotten about God and now we are defenceless against Satan’s foul facial farts. We need to return to our churches. Islam must be eradicated. And we must punish gays, lesbians and atheists because God is clearly ignoring us for tolerating their obscenities.”

Leading theologians expect God to respond promptly should the EU meet its promises. Michael Lloyd of the Church of the Suffering Christ expects a speedy response from God, “From what we know, God is always ready to forgive. And he always responds very quickly to sincere pleas for mercy. I expect the ash cloud to disperse within minutes of the ratification of the new treaty.”

“Godless Europe has no defence against Satan, who can’t waft his noxious breath towards America because too many good Christians live there”, he added.

The markets also rallied after news of the new treaty, after one of the worst openings in months. One city trader expressed his relief at the news, “We’re just beginning to recover from the recession. Armageddon would be a dreadful setback now. I’m glad the EU has responded positively.”

Labour’s faith-based misadventures

November 20, 2009

The community secretary John Denham recently announced an initiative to convene faith and voluntary groups to trouble-shoot pertinent issues like ‘parenting and the environment’. How jolly. How perfectly, joyously, harmoniously dandy. The beneficent and frolicsome faith groups and secular voluntary groups can link arms and hug each other thereby solving all the problems of contemporary Britain. This all sounds very convivial but I think I blacked out when I read the following on the Communities and Local Government website:

In the midst of a global economic recession driven by lending, Mr Denham believes that the values which faith groups share – justice, equality, engagement – and the aim of Inter Faith Week to bring people of faith and no faith together, could be a starting point for building consensus for a stronger, fairer society.

Did you get that? Justice, equality and engagement. Say those words aloud a few times. Now stick Faith Groups in front of them followed by a colon. Is it still working for you? No. It’s bollocks–misguided liberal bollocks. You mean like justice, equality and engagement that faith groups demonstrate towards outgroups like, um, gays? Or all the other faith groups? Or what about women, adulterers, agnostics, etc?

Mercifully AC Grayling lambasted this initiative in the Guardian prompting Denham to go on the defensive two days later in the same paper.

The Labour government has had a bizarre love affair with faith politics during its incumbency, with Blair and a few other Labour goons peddling an imbecilic advocacy of religion for the public domain. Faith schools are paid for mainly by public money, an egregious stipend for any secular taxpayer. And now public money is subsidising more ludicrous faith-based bullshit. What happened to keeping Church and State separate?

The Daily Wail goes too far

October 16, 2009

It was only a matter of time before a columnist at the Mail took the homophobia obsession too far. They can easily churn out similar comments like Jan Moir’s every week without evoking a backlash but using Gately’s death as an opportunity to take another swipe at homosexuality was genuinely stupid and has resulted in predictable recriminations. Then the Mail took the highly unusual action of issuing a clarifying statement from Moir.

So these comments aren’t even a teeny-weeny bit homophobic:

The sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath

Whatever the cause of death is, it is not, by any yardstick, a natural one

we would have to admit that the circumstances surrounding his death are more than a little sleazy.

it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages

under the carapace of glittering, hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see.*

No, no, no– I mean, Jesus, no; that’s not I meant at all. If you’ll just let me explain…

“Some people, particularly in the gay community, have been upset by my article about the sad death of Boyzone member Stephen Gately. This was never my intention. Stephen, as I pointed out in the article was a charming and sweet man who entertained millions.

“However, the point of my column-which, I wonder how many of the people complaining have fully read – was to suggest that, in my honest opinion, his death raises many unanswered questions. That was all. Yes, anyone can die at anytime of anything. However, it seems unlikely to me that what took place in the hours immediately preceding Gately’s death – out all evening at a nightclub, taking illegal substances,  bringing a stranger back to the flat, getting intimate with that stranger – did not have a bearing  on his death. At  the very least, it could have exacerbated an underlying medical condition.

“The entire matter of his sudden death seemed to have been handled with undue haste when lessons could have been learned. On this subject, one very important point.  When I wrote that ‘he would want to set an example to any impressionable young men who may want to emulate what they might see as his glamorous routine’, I was referring to the drugs and the casual invitation extended  to a stranger. Not to the fact of his homosexuality.  In writing that ‘it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships’ I was suggesting that civil partnerships – the introduction of which I am on the record in supporting – have proved just to be as problematic as marriages.

“In what is clearly a heavily orchestrated internet campaign I think it is mischievous in the extreme to suggest that my article has homophobic and bigoted undertones.”

Even for a Mail pundit this is bad. They are normally very adroit at masking their bigotry by spuriously writing bullshit but she has foolishly used a well-liked public figure to air her smalls. Now the genie is out and all the inane and insincere clarifications and retractions in world can’t unpublish that article, or convince the public that it is anything other than what it is–a veiled dig at fags, published by a newspaper which is comprehensively against poofs and their sordid shenanigans. Moir can lead us on a mendacious little dance with her sophistic statement, but one line that will never fail to break the bullshitometer is her assertion that “the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see.”

Remember this, though: The Mail is not a newspaper whose function is simply reporting unbiased news; it is just giving its readers what they want irrespective of anything. The truth is wholly mutable in the Daily Mail even when it is so rarely employed. Moir is simply writing what’s expected of her because sordidly speculating about the circumstances preceding Gately’s death which she can know almost nothing about, is what these columnists are paid to do. They are arch speculators. The people who actually run the paper will never be lambasted because they are largely insulated from criticism. They simply don’t give a fairy what happens as long as the profits are healthy. Moir is unfortunate in that there are more bigoted writers than her at the Mail who escape the opprobrium by being cannier than her in dressing up their prejudices. It is the involvement of Gately’s death that has enraged so many. No doubt the PCC will investigate and issue an utterly wanky statement about the piece being only someone’s opinion.

Incidentally, ‘sleazy’ is a word that springs unbidden to mind when I think of the Mail; it means sordid, corrupt or immoral, all of which apply.

The Prick Shtick

November 14, 2008

‘If people want to get on in life they just need to use the internet’. So says Tom. I think the quote is verbatim but I’m not sure because I lapsed into an apopleptic rage during the film so I’m still trying piece together ten minutes of my life which remain unaccounted for, and still trying to wash the blood from my clothes. But I know that Tom was featured on a late night BBC programme called On Top Of The Digital World last night, about the yoot and the internet, and, consequently, a largely retarded waste of my £140 license fee, invariably squandered by misguided liberals at the BBC. Tom rhapsodised about how the internet turned him from a nobody into a celebrity cocksucker.

Thank you Tom for your wisdom which will impel legions of teenagers to forgo the abject boredom of conventional education to embrace the transformative powers of the Internet. Because, Tom, everyone can be an entrepreneurial wanker if only they have the, oh I don’t know–stratospheric campness–of your sad plagiarised shtick. You’re happy to be interviewed, lauding your attempts to become a TV presenter, via your internet shenanigans. But you and your vacuous contemporaries should politely go away. Please. You all do nothing but perpetuate a dysfunctional, insidious metanarrative, shamelessly worshiping mediocrity and opportunism.

This is the horseshit that TV license payers are subsidising while they sleep. But more significantly, it is the real license fee scandal. Forget Brand and Ross, that was just the authoritarian bigots on their moral outrage campaign. No scandal there, just anger and prejudice. But I object stridently to the imbecilic, brain-atrophying ‘advice’ touted here by a celebrity-obsessed Tom.