Monday, 15 June 2009


I am today, Mr Nearly DunSpeakin’, launching a far-reaching cover-up into the entirely legal and proportionate and may I say, Mr Dunspeakin’, brief, Iraq incursion which has led to millions of deaths but most of them wogs and which, I remind honourable and right honourable members, we all voted for, apart from the Liberal party and nobody gives, Mr Dunspeakin’, a fuck about them, walking about in sandals and paying young men to defecate into their mouths, Mr Dunspeakin’, as they do. And nor, I remind the house, does anyone give a fuck about the wogs, obviously. Or we wouldnae a been firing cruise missiles at half a million quid apiece into their school playgrounds; only not Brother KeithVaz and Brother Trevor Phillips who are, as near as damnit, Mr Dunspeakin’, decent, white Presbyterians. Only still nig-nogs at heart.

The enquiry will find that many were to blame but none are accountable and this is in the finest traditions of this house, alongside the so-called flipping of second homes, the avoidance of capital gains tax and the acting like worthless thieving bastards which so distinguishes my cabinet and the gentlemen-comedians, coke-snorters, arse-bandits, grave robbers, child molesters, shoefetishfreaks and bagladies opposite.

The enquiry will find that the world is indeed a much better place without the late Mr Hussein who, in the best traditions of my party, the Labour Party, was publicly hanged, thus providing much amusement in the Washington Chimpanzee House, even though it isn’t, the world, that is. Mr Dunspeakin’, a better place but far worse. But we will find, Mr Dunspeakin’ that salaries and pensions in this place will be adjusted to allow for the fact that members are no longer able to run a property business on the side, and this would be the right thing for the hard-working homeless families and small goneoutofbusiness businesses up and down the country, if we want the best in parliament we need to pay members salaries commensurate with those received by other organised criminals.

There will need to be a mild rebuke of the Papist Blair and his woman, Imelda, but nothing which would tarnish his reputation as a peace-making man of God - only not, I point out, modestly, a son of the fucking manse - else the whole house of cards might come tumbling down.

If crimes there are then they will be found to have been committed by rogue private soldiers and not by our friend, Major-General Rupert Jockstrap-Golightly or indeed any commissioned member of Her Majesty’s First Rocking Horse Cavalry whom, as members will know, we may well need to deploy at home against the people if our freedoms are to be preserved

Once again the house is indebted to Baron Peter FitzYuri of Hart-le-pool for finding some blackmailable civil servant to chair the cover-up. Guided by my own moral compass, Lord Peter, twice disgraced and exiled has returned to the bosom of the party which spawned him, or he, or he, or he, or he, Mr Dunspeakin’, it.

I have said recently, Mr Dunspeakin’, that I would listen, that I would listen, that I would listen, that I would listen more to what, to what, to what, to what, to what people say, Mr Dunspeakin’ and people are saying they want a full, open and very public enquiry into why we presided over such a catalogue of war crimes, why my right honourable friend, Mr Jack Torture, lied his face off to the UN and why the Papist Blair, immediately upon leaving office, was found to have such banking skills that Messrs GlobaDeath engaged him at five million dollars a year; people, rightly want to know who did and said what and to whom and why and they want it all out in the open. So Mr Dunspeakin’ the enquiry will sit entirely in private, or in camera, as we scholars say and will report only to me exactly what I have told it to; it is only by a full and frank cover-up such as this that we will be able to keep the homeless families and small goneoutofbusiness businesses entirely in the dark and at our mercy and I commend this cover-up to the house.

Cheers! hear-hear! hear-hear! For Gordon’s a jolly good ladyman!Hurrah!


The Dyer's Garden said...

Watch, Ishmael, that you do not go the way of NightJack.

call me ishmael said...

what happened, Mr The Dyers Garden, to Mr Nightjack?

The Dyer's Garden said...

woman on a raft said...

Dear Mr Ishmael

The police may well have known who NJ was, but his material presented officers sympathetically and provided a valuable channel of feed-back.

The Times discovered his identity and made a point of dobbing him in to his employers, thereby forcing them to take action.

NJ tried resorting to the law, but Mr Justice Arsehole ruled tolerably consistently with established law, most of which has been made up as he went along by the same Mr Justice Arsehole.

The Times could have just let the injunction stand, or even if they won a challenge, refused to run the story and kept schtum in order to encourage other officers to whisper to them in future. This is how journalists get stories and how they find out about the corruption of power.

Instead the Times took the stance of naming NightJack in order to punish him for building an audience instead of giving them the stories and letting them decide what was fit to print.

I hereby apply to have James Harding, editor of the Times, who will have signed off the legal bill, given a right shoeing for having all the journalistic instincts of a fascist dictator, who can't but see a well of information before pissing in it and then rolling a rock across the spring.

The Dyer's Garden said...

Generate enough interest and some hack(er) will be on your tail, was my point. So corrosive this desire to shine a light on every mystery as if demystifying anything ever did anyone any good.

call me ishmael said...

Ah, yes, Mr The Dyer's Garden, thanks, I see what you mean.

black hole sunset said...

I must confess, Mr Ishmael, to having used short phrases from the works Mr Stan, and your good self, on a small number of occasions, without explicit attribution.

"LibDem Toileteers", "two faced greedy ....", "breath smelling of wine and ...", "up against the wall ..." that type of thing. Also, concepts such as the fabled Rocking Horse and associated activities.

Where I haven't linked back to yourself or Mr Stan, it's been for the simple reason of not wanting yourselves to be tarred with a brush that is more appropriate to my own blatherings.

This is, for me, an awkward balancing act of presumption. An instinct to promote what is admired, but not to diminish it by association.

No offence is intended, or claim implied.

call me ishmael said...

Och, no, Mr black Hole sunset, I don't mean that; I don't believe in copyright or blog as private property, it's an oxymoron, innit, that, a bit like Gerry and Cilla McCann, leave their treasure out there for anyone to come along and nick amd then scream like bastards when it happens. If the blogger doesn't want his thoughts circulated he should keep them to himself

Mr stanislav, particulary, has been widely reposted and his phrases and characters entered a dark vernacular and he is glad of that, I think he was just a bit peeved at Mr NJ's flippant tone - I can't be bothered to write anything, try this.

My point, obviously clumsily made, was that Mr NJ seemed to be choosing which bits of law and etiquette applied to him -OK for him to repost in toto another's work, without permission or advice, not OK for someone else to name him; as though there were conventions, courtesies but all of them in his favour, and the idea, further, of an apparent would-be outlaw going to the High Court to protect his pension seemed preposterous.

It is a Fool's errand to try to restrict the ownership of mr stanislav or anyone else for that matter and it's quite ungracious, and so he has never bothered - some would-be novelist,a contact of our late friend, mr an ex apprentice, has an impudent rider on her blog "please email me for permission to reprint my thoughts" honest, not invent - that other people want to repost is, surely, more gratification than irritant; it's just that, a propos Mr Old Bill, those who bleat about niceties should maybe start, themselves, observing them.

I hope that is clearer, there is no need for you or anyone else to claim "no offence or claim intended," I know that. My complaint was, or should have been, tightly focused on just one instance.

Personal feelings aside, I still cannot agree with Mrs Woman On A Raft on the idea that Mr NJ was entitled either to the protection of eitherthe Court or of skyTimesmadeupnewsandfilth; the whole area is anomalous - Mr Pizza reclining before the world on the Daily Politics sofa comes to mind, whilst attempting to maintain a nom de plume, ludicrous.

We have time for some more questions on the curious nature of anonymous celebrity bloggers....

Next week we are in Hemel Hempstead where the panel will not include Tony McNutter or Hazel Dwarf but some other shower of pompous, greedy fuckwits.

Swiss Bob said...

Mr Smith,

As always you come at a story from a unique perspective.

For my part I can't understand why he thought he could remain anonymous, he's a plod and knows better than most how easy it is to dig up information on someone, especially when one is stupid enough to post information that makes you easily identifiable.

He seems to have a nice book deal and a (paid for?) article in the TImes so I shant worry too much about his prospects.

black hole sunset said...

Thanks Mr Ishmael, and Mr Stan too, that's a very gracious and generous stance to take with such fine work.

Great Big Billygoat Gruff said...

Brown a Ladymanm naw.

Ladyboy, in the best Singaporean tradition