Writing for Newsjack

For those that don’t know I write for a BBC radio comedy… but before you start thinking I’m ‘someone’; so do hundreds of other people. “No wonder the BBC is having to make cutbacks if it’s employing all these people to write for one show” you may be thinking, but you’re wrong. Newsjack has an open door policy, so anyone can send in material. But now the final deadline has passed us by, so no more last minute attempts to satirise current affairs in the attempt of building up a portfolio in the world of the comedy writer. It’s back to avoiding newspapers like Liam Fox (mmm … satire*).

My style of writing for Newsjack is basically, throw everything I can at them, sit back, constantly refreshing my hotmail account in hope that I receive an email informing me I've had material accepted. But I wasn't lucky enough this series, obviously by “lucky enough”, I mean “good enough”.

You see, the thing is when you're writing your little one-liners or sketches, you think you actually have something of quality; an actual piece of comedy gold that stands a chance of getting aired. That optimism lasts form Monday/Tuesday [when you send your material in] until late Thursday, when the inevitable happens and you don't receive that email. At that point you look back over what you've written and realise how drastically awful the whole thing was and how much of an idiot you were for thinking that poorly stringed together bunch of toss was ever going to be considered for broadcast. You feel shitty. You then listen to the show and feel shittier because;

a) Someone else used an angle you had, but in such a better way you begin to question why on Earth you think that you can compete with writers [that get material accepted] when your approach is so blatantly simple a child that eats PVA glue could have come up with it.

b) You hear a sketch/one-liner that you feel is substandard and you begin to wonder why your substandard material was passed over for that. You then go on to realise that you clearly know nothing about producing or writing for a radio show, so why should you hate on someone else's hard work, when they're the ones receiving a cheque from the BBC and you're not.

Eventually you calm down and last week's knock back inspires you to write something better. So you plunge yourself into the week's news, furiously jotting down fragmented ideas. You go on to construct them into sketches/one-liners. You convince yourself these are way better than last week's effort and the whole cycle begins again. Optimism. Failure. Self-loathing. Back to the drawing board... or writing table.

The hardest aspect of writing for Newsjack, in my eyes is writing for the tone of the show. This is of course the most vital aspect too, the show can't simply throw out a bunch of sketches that don't follow suit; witty satire is probably the summation of what they're after. While my style of writing is more offensive and blatant; that's probably why my sketch; “Top Five things that make Cameron a Massive Cunt” never got the chance it deserved. But it becomes hard to understand why material gets passed over, from my point of view. I mean I was lucky enough [obviously by “lucky enough”, I mean “good enough”] to get a one-liner accepted in series four. Yet I thought that I'd sent in one-liners that were better than that.

Anyhow, here's a handful of my rejected one-liners and parts from sketches;

UPBEAT MAN: After the Foreign Office warned against visiting Kenya, our travel agent arranged us a place in Cape Town at no extra fee, which is good because it can cost an arm and a leg or a leg at least.

HOST: Boris Johnson opened London Fashion week, William Hague was due to do the opening but a wardrobe malfunction left him unable to come out of the closet.

WOMAN: In Libya David Cameron said the Arab Spring could become an Arab Summer, because ultimately he wants to see the Arab Fall.

HOST: David Walliams’ Thames challenge has shown the nation that persistence, determination and a good pair of swimming goggles will eventually get you through everybody else’s shit.

[from a Sketch about Boris Johnson opening fashion week;]
HOST: Now live from fashion week, we are joined by a man that’s got so many depressed women naked he makes Peter Stringfellow look like a rank amateur; Gok Wan.

… all now fantastically outdated and have stood the test of time like a bunch of cheap flowers.

*I'd like to point out that the line there was [slightly] satirical when I began this blog, but as I usually do I gave up on this blog about ten minutes after starting it and only returned to it as I was unable to create a new topic to write about. Although this has probably added more to that joke as it's no longer satire, which also criticises my attempts at satire; mmm … self-loathing.

Who's Really Behind the Riots? An Alternative View

There have been a couple of riots lately, but you already know that. Us; average, non-rioting motley crew of stay-at-homes have had every type of daily medium we deal with taken over by the riots; TV, radio, Facebook, Twitter ... We’ve been absolutely bombarded with images, videos and stories of the riots, I think we’d have seen less rioting if we’d have actually been out rioting.

Of course, as always people are desperate to get to the bottom of what caused the riots? And they’re serving up the usual batch of shit. But don’t fear, because I don’t have a narrow minded view of the revolting classes that choose to revolt. I have no bias towards the police, or as I call them; “murderous, racist scum pigs”. I do hate Cameron, but that goes without saying. People are too restricted with their views on what is causing the riots; I’m here to suggest some alternative views.

The Kaiser Chiefs
Firstly let me say; I’ve even seen Hip Hop mentioned as a cause... yet I didn’t realise that the riots had a soundtrack. I think instead of initially suspecting that ‘urban types’ only listen to Hip Hop, we as a public should acknowledge that Hip Hop is fair superior to any other type of music as it’s subject matter spans the widest range of topics and it captivates every single emotion humanly possible, and that, at the end of the day we are all Hip Hop fans, so it should no longer by dragged into the spotlight and labelled as a causation of crime. The next time some buffoon decides to falsely acknowledge that a genre of music is a causation of violent or criminal behaviour, I’mma pop a cap in ass! Word to his crack-smokin’ momma!

In 2004 the Kaiser Chiefs predicted a riot. Yep, seven years ago these guys knew it was coming and they did nothing to try and stop it. In my opinion that is completely shameful. Why aren’t the media turning on them? I’ve seen a rapper on Newsnight condemning the actions of these rioters, but where the fuck are the Kaiser Chiefs? They aren’t condemning what they predicted, they aren’t apologising for not working more closely with the police to put together a plan to halt or even curb the rage we’ve seen lately. I think there should be a national campaign against the band until they are demoted to Kaiser Constables.

Out-of-Work Builders
For a change we need to take into account who’s really profiteering off of these riots. Yes, maybe a looter has got a new flat-screen TV or brand new pair of Nikes, but it is out-of-work builders that are going to see an increase of cash flow over the coming days, weeks and months. For this reason we must suspect that they could be the ones inciting these riots.

Let’s face it; the economy isn’t at its strongest these days and companies aren’t splashing out money on rebuilding stores, so builders must create business for themselves. How would they go about doing that? By burning buildings down! It’s the fucking out-of-work builders, people, think about it!

JD Sport/Currys
Two of the most looted stores in the riots have been JD Sport and Currys. Is this a coincidence? No, of course not.

As I have already mentioned we are currently in an economical downturn and in the world of capitalism flagging companies will do anything to stay afloat. Let’s face it, out of all of the chav attire supplying, discount sports shops JD has to be one of the weakest. Also; not too long ago there was a Currys in Derby’s Westfield Centre (a big mall/shopping centre) until it relocated because the company could no longer afford the rent! This is a national supplier of electrical goods that can’t afford to pay rent, I’m constantly broke and even I can afford to pay rent, which means, I, as an individual, am currently more successful than Currys. These two companies probably aren’t turning over money like they used to. So the riots and looting have almost certainly given them the chance to cash in on some major insurance claims. These companies will more than likely make more money from insurance claims over the next few days than they would have made all year.

Rupert Murdoch
It’s become a struggle to remember what the news was reporting on before the riots, some people are even suggesting news coverage never existed before the riots, well it did people! And the biggest news story was the phone hacking scandal. Do you remember now?

I wouldn’t put it past Mr. Murdoch and his vile excreting media outlets to create a national ruckus to defer attention away from himself and the News of the World story. Both The Sun and The Times [both owned by Murdoch’s NewsCorp] have been reporting on the riots, this only acts as further proof, surely! Now with the riots in full swing people’s minds have been overloaded and actions of Murdoch’s minions have been cast to the never regions of our collective memory bank. I’m willing to bet those investigating the scandal have forgot about it, leaving everyone involved to get off scot-free.

So there it is people. Instead of blaming a couple of youths that like setting buildings alight and looting clothes and electrical goods, maybe we should start casting doubt over the individuals and companies that are really making financial and personal gain over what has been taking place. Then, perhaps, we will see who is really to blame [hint; it’s those people I’ve just mentioned] ... and the Kaiser Chiefs, don’t forget about the fucking Kaiser Chiefs.

Ben on Bin

Osama bin Laden from Al-Jazeera’s popular ratings grabber; “Jihad Hour” television show has been shot in the face Call of Duty style. America has finally nabbed the Worst’s Most Wanted Man, although it’s kind of a hollow victory to say that, as they are the ones that bestowed that accolade on him in the first place.

Everyone has an opinion on the death of Osama bin Laden and the way it [/he] was executed by the American dudes [can’t remember what they were; Navy Seals I think], so you’ve read theirs, so here is mine;

Should They Have Killed Him?
I have never killed a man, check my non-existent police file if you don’t believe me. I’m not sure what it takes to kill another man, although weapons and ammo would logically be the best place to start. I think, please remember my education on military action comes from watching Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan, taking him alive would have been better, yet I was not invited to take part in the raid of his lair [you have to call the house he was staying in a lair – it drives home the impression he was a criminal mastermind, the sort of villain James Bond would fight in one of his terribly predictable films], probably because my armed forces knowledge is based around TV and film. I would say taking him alive would have likely provided more information on al-Qaida via waterboarding which is very different from wakeboarding, yet I always think they’re the same thing. If they were able to capture him maybe eventually we’d [the public] would have got to see a photo of him in his underwear just like Saddam Hussein – remember that? How funny was that?

Was it Right to Shoot an Unarmed Man?
When I first saw the headline, I thought it read; “Bin Laden Unharmed”, I instantly thought he was some super human, or some kind of deity, that he really was chosen by Allah and that it was time to convert to Islam. Thankfully, I’d just misread the word, he was unarmed, as in he had no weapons. One newspaper [The Sun, I think] went with the headline; “Bin Laden Unarmed like his victims on 9/11 and 7/7”, which I’m not sure about, guns are very popular and easy to come by in the States, I’m willing to bet a couple of people that died that day were packing heat, but that’s besides the point.

It has been stressed that Bin Laden could have been wearing a suicide vest, which is true, he could have been, yet that makes me think if this is likely he’d have to wear a suicide vest constantly. I know the man was dedicated to the fall of the West and global Islam, but wearing a suicide vest all the time? It’s a lot to ask, especially when you’re living in a ‘safe house’.
But was it right? Face it, if anyone deserves to be shot unarmed it is Osama Bin Laden [from a Westerners point of view anyway]. Of course from the other point of view this action is easy to propagate into terrorism by America.

Should They Have Buried Him at Sea?
This topic is causing problems. Some are saying that it wasn’t fitting with Islamic tradition; others are saying he doesn’t deserve any right to have a traditional burial. As I keep saying I have never killed a man, yet if I did I would be in quite a rush to dispose of the body, it’s like Murder 101. Maybe this is what happened with the Osama’s corpse, plus who’d want a decomposing body on their ship? Not me, that’s for sure. How can you enjoy a good game of shuffleboard with a fucking cadaver stinking up the fresh sea breeze? The argument for burying him at sea was that his grave could become a shrine for extremists. I don’t know if American intelligence [and I use that term loosely] know this but; you can create a shrine for someone anywhere, not just of their graves. I’ve created numerous shrines to the girls/women I’ve been stalking over the years. Those shrines made up of locks of hair, toe nail cuttings, blurry photos and used tampons were always constructed in my wardrobe, not once was it on their shrine made on their grave, even after they all died under strange circumstances … like I’ve said; I have never killed a man. The American’s apparently tried to pawn off his body to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, yet shockingly they didn’t want it. America’s relationship with these two countries isn’t exactly great, trying to shift off his body to these is like calling in a favour from a Facebook friend [you accept yet have no contact with, they’re just there to bunk up your friend count] to help dispose of the body of that Jennifer girl you’ve been stalking.

Did Pakistan Know He Was There?
I have no idea. Next question.

Should America Release the Photos?
Not the ones of Pippa Middleton in a bikini – because we all want to see those, but the ones of a dead Osama. It is believed that releasing the photos would cause outrage in the Arab would, you know, like killing him DIDN’T! It would be nice to see some proof, as conspiracy theorists are always going to deny it was Osama, now they have good reason too. I don’t think it should stop at the photos, I want to see the video feed captured on one of the troops head-cam, that apparently Obama was watching [not sure if it was the President, at first it was then apparently it was someone else watching it, relaying to the Head of State – the story changes so much, spurring on conspiracy theorists]. We got to see Saddam die, why not Osama too? America has released some DVDs/Videos captured from Osama’s ‘mansion’ today, but they’ve removed the audio as the speeches may rally extremists because as we all know Arab people can’t lip-read! The videos released apparently feature bloopers too – which I joked about via Facebook the day of his death.

Was it Worth it?
Well American’s were celebrating in the streets, which I can understand to a certain degree. The man has become to the face of terrorism and now he’s gone. Now we have to wait and see what will transpire next. A warning has already been put out that terrorists could respond to the death of their leader – so the world is no safer without him. America is now attempting to hunt down Bin Laden’s number two; al-Zawahiri, so it’s clear that the War on Terrorism is far from over – plus Americans will always need someone to hunt down so they can withhold their positions in the Middle-East. Of course it is likely that just because you’ve removed the head of al-Qaida there’s nothing from it growing another one, like Jeebs the pawn shop owner from Men in Black.

Obama has received a rise in popularity in the polls due to Osama’s death. Which is good for him, I suppose. Nick Clegg could have single-handedly captured Osama, bought him back to England in a headlock and still wouldn’t have seen his popularity rises in the local elections.

Whatever your opinion on Bin Laden, keep it to yourself, because all this talk of it is getting old, at least when the Royal Wedding was in the news I could check out pictures of Pippa Middleton’s lovely bottom.

An in Depth Look into the Governments Decision to Remove Cigarette Displays – by a Twat

Be gone free choice, we pitiful human beings can longer be trusted with you. We’ve had you and look at what some of us have gone and done; we’ve chosen to smoke. Yes, we’ve decided to take up a habit the increases our chances of getting a long, long list of diseases. We’ve picked an addiction that now leaves us castrated from the rest of society and their non-black lungs – but do you know what, we still don’t give a fuck because we still look cool.

So after adding written warnings to cigarette packets, an advertisement ban, adding graphic [warning] images to cigarette packets and introducing a smoking ban – it seems like the war against smoking has stepped it up a gear again; cigarette displays will soon be removed from shops. [I would have put an emoticon sad face here, but I’m not a twelve year old girl – unless I’m in chat room ;-) lolz XxX]

Don’t get me wrong, I understand that stopping people smoking seems like a good thing. I suppose we’ll get a healthier nation; people will live longer and be able to pay more tax. Plus less people will be ill, that means there’ll be less of a burden for the NHS – just in time as it looks like plenty of staff will be out of a job soon.

I see a lot of people saying that this is all for the youth of today, they’re too easily grasped by the evil hands of nicotine. Kids will be kids. Some will smoke, some won’t. People act like this is a new craze, it’s been happening for years. My great-grandmother started smoking around her mid-teens and carried on for the rest of life until it was cut short in her 90s – imagine how long she would have lived if she never picked up the habit.

The thing I can’t understand is the logic behind removing cigarette displays. All the previous laws introduced do have at least some sense behind them, but this is completely lost on me. As for forcing tobacco companies to package their product in plain packaging – what the fuck is that about? No, honestly. Can someone tell me? I understand that the designs on cigarette packets is all cool and stuff [apart from the pictures of tumours and shit] – but if cigarettes are to be kept under the counter soon, why on earth would you need to put them in plain packages? It’s like gouging a blind man’s eyes out. Is it in case someone catches a glimpse of them before the customer puts them in their pocket or handbag? Does the sight of cigarettes offend people that much, or is it that if a young impressionable child gets a sight of the shiny packet they’ll instantly want to start smoking?

Let kids smoke is what I say - they’re all little, ungrateful, idiotic cunts anyway [according to most media outlets] – they don’t deserve to live a long and fruitful life.

Yeah, I’ve reached a point in which I don’t know how to finish things off, as this was just a quick exercise, so here’s a list of other ways [that one day may be introduced by government] to stop people from smoking;

- Sowing people’s mouths closed, making all food in liquid form and have the entire population communicate by sign-language.
- Ban lighters and matches so smokers have to light cigarettes by bashing bits of flint together or rubbing a stick on another stick.
- Fitting designated smoking areas will sprinkler systems that go off over five seconds.
- Whenever a customer purchases some cigarettes a loud alarm goes off alerting everyone in the shop – much to the embarrassment of the customer.
- Breaking the fingers of smokers and would-be-smokers so they can’t spark up.
- Douse individuals in petrol so they can’t spark up – although the way petrol prices are rocketing this is doubtful.
- Nuke us. Just set off a nuclear bomb that kills us all. Then the only smoking we’ll be doing is that of our charred remains.

Until next time – when I’ll spend time and attention towards something good.

Topical Sketch #1: Beckham's Hot Spa

I thought it's about time I try my hand at writing topical sketches as it's something that (particularly) radio shows are after. I've written a couple of sketches so far, but they're ideas that have been given time to ferment and I've gone back and changed them – adding and removing parts in an attempt to get them just right. Whereas with topical sketches, I feel like you've just got to bang them out quite fast, you can't sit around waiting or by the time you've got it perfect the subject matter is no longer topical – which makes your sketch dated and therefore pointless.

So here's the first. It's about David Beckham playing for Tottenham Hotspurs.

Beckham's Hot Spa (Sketch)

Ben Broughton’s 2-Point Plan to Save the Economy

I know many people that return to read my Blog have been looking forward to my insightful knowledge and rationality being turned towards something that none of us can avoid; the economy. Seeing as last week David Cameron and one of his millionaire, Tory stooges; Jeremy Hunt [coincidentally he is what his second name rhymes with – and I don’t mean front or blunt*] decided to axe the UK Film Council, it seems as if the only way this current Conservative government can make headway is by cutting and slashing anything, like a knife wielding maniac on crystal meth. So, I’m not one to disappoint [outside of the bedroom], so here it is; a couple of ideas that strengthen the British economy.

The One-Child Policy
I will admit that China did have this idea first, but like an MP dealing with the economy at the minute I’ve simply stole it. Of course, seeing as China’s population is now over a billion I’m not sure if it’s working too well over there, I think us Brits could band together and show them how it should be done.

If couples deluded enough to even want children in the first place simply had one child they could focus all their attention towards it. This is extremely beneficial, although I’m willing to take the chance of making Britain over run with spoilt children. Less children means smaller classes at school, which leads to more attention from teachers, which leads to smarter students, which leads to more intellectual adults (as they grow up), which leads to a better society. At the minute there’s some figure going around explaining how many people are going for one job, I can’t remember the figure and I’m too lazy to Google it, but let’s just say it’s 20 people. After about two decades of The One-Child Policy, that number will be dramatically lower and the skills possessed by those going for the job will be much higher.

I know that this policy is going to be met with a massive backlash, I understand that people don’t want to be told how many children they can have, but you know what; life’s shit and if you don’t like it fuck off to France. I also understand it will take a long time for the benefits of this policy to start taking effect, at least two decades but this is just a testament to my future thinking. I’m not making policies that will make a bit of money here and there now; I’m concentrating on the future of this country.

In a time when the media perpetuates an image of the youth being good for nothing, criminal minded, drug addled, scum living life how they seem fit no matter who it causes problems for, they are bound to back this idea. Fewer children means paedophiles would find it harder to kidnap their victims, so to be against The One-Child Policy is just like saying “Paedophiles are good for England” – you sick bastards.

Plus wouldn’t it just be better to have fewer kids around?

Legalisation of Cannabis
I’ve already talked about how the legalisation of cannabis would deflate the number of stabbings in this country. Although have you noticed that the coverage of people getting stabbed is much lower than it was say two years ago? Nobody in the media seems to care about kids killing each other anymore, not since the economical crisis, but either way legalisation of cannabis is always the answer to whatever problem the media is currently serving up to the fearful population.

Legalisation would benefit the economy in varies ways. Firstly taxing cannabis would create an influx of money towards the government, maybe then they can stop cutting jobs in the public sector. Making cannabis legal would open up new business ventures in the UK, following the model of Coffee Shops in Amsterdam, of course the current (and what some may call fascist) smoking Ban would have to be altered with business owners having to apply for a Smoking Licence, so customers would be able to smoke in their establishments. The legalisation would leave the Police with more money to go after and prosecute ‘real’ drug dealers too.

Legalisation would create so much more money in this country; it’s unbelievable that nobody in power has even suggested it.

*Cunt, Jeremy Hunt is a cunt, in case you didn’t get it.

Nineteen Sixty-What?

Well it’s over for another four years. The time has come to remove those awful flags from your car windows, now you can wind down those windows and allow fresh air to circulate in that sauna with wheels that you call a car. Simultaneously, take down those St. George flags and Union Flags and pack them away, as if a BNP rally has ended. England are out of the World Cup. [I just had a really bad déjà vu!]

I’m not the type of person to sit around and slag off a bunch of overpaid sporty types that are unable to succeed in a game [that’s made them rich] as most of these men can’t succeed in a long term relationship with their wives, so what else could we as a nation expect from these simple human beings?

People tell me that the Premiership is the best football league in the world, yet this country is unable to put together a team that can reach the finals of a World Cup. I think I know now why; there are not enough foreigners in the England squad! If we sneak a couple in next time maybe we’ll do better. That’s just my suggestion; I’m simply putting it out their … like pubic lice. Plus with foreign players the foreign manager could speak foreign to them and they could play some good old fashioned foreign football.

Anyway, this Blog isn’t about England’s endless amount of failures, it’s about England’s endless obsession with its one victory. In case you’ve recently took an heavy blow to the head and happened to forget this little fact, I’ll remind you; in 1966 England won the World Cup. Hooray! Only 44 years ago, we had the best football team in the entire World. Yes, FOURTY-FOUR YEARS AGO! For fuck sake England (I’m addressing the whole nation here – like The Queen on Christmas Day), can we please get over this one minor victory? Isn’t it time we let this go? It only happened once, why do we keep dragging it up again and again and again and them some more. We can move on from this insignificant blimp that plagues our record of misery, I know we can. It’s akin to an old decrepit woman with her wrinkly skin drooping off of her frail frame, her face sporting a whisker moustache, her arthritis riddled hand precariously holding a old battered photograph of herself in her 20s looking young and beautiful, saying; “Look how good I used to look.” Yeah, but fucking look at you know, you fucking bag of bones, you’re revolting, even Rooney wouldn’t have a crack.

Let’s face it, most of us weren’t around at this time and those that are old enough to remember it have probably forgotten due to old age or going senile (example; The Queen) or they have been a victim to Harold Shipman. It’s borderline pathetic to be honest with you. When I was five, I found 20p on the floor; I don’t still go on about it every single chance I get [This time doesn’t count; I’m simply using it to show you how miniscule 1966 really is for comical effect]. Imagine being around someone that constantly told the story of the time they found 20p, every time they saw a 20p coin. You’d eventually lose it [your temper, not 20p] and fill a sock with 20p pieces and proceed to beat them to death in their sleep, not caring about the consequences of your actions, they deserved to die after all. I’m not saying that people that constantly talk about 1966 should be killed with a sock filled with the ashes of most of England’s 1966 squad. That’d be wrong and slightly disgusting, plus I highly doubt the majority of ash would stay in the sock for the duration of the beating. Simple torture would deal with these people. Not deadly horrible torture, something similar to A Clockwork Orange, in which a fan is strapped to a chair and forced to watch back to back footage of England losing game after game until the fan has cried himself into such a dehydrated state he simply ceases to live for the rest of his life.

What we need to grasp now is; football is a different game. The 1966 squad has no connection with the current team. They just play for the same country, 44 years down the line. Plenty has happened in those 44 years; the internet, mobile phones, I was born, you were probably born too, but most importantly other countries got really good at football. So we should simply embrace our never ending display of despair and keep the feeling of disappointment in our hearts.

Banned Together Against TurBanneds

I’ve started to notice a couple of people posting this shitty “News” story about England shirts being banned from pubs on Facebook, and comments following about “turbans should be banned”.

The following message was taken from on of many people’s status updates;

POLICE ARE GOING AROUND PUBS AND CLUBS SAYING THAT WE CANT WEAR OUR ENGLAND TOPS 4 THE FOOTIE & GOTTA TAKE THE FLAGS DOWN AS IT IS UPSETTING THE PEOPLE THAT DONT COME FROM HERE !!NOW IM NOT RACIST , BUT THIS IS TAKING THE FUCKING PISS! THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND WE NEED 2 MAKE A STAND IF YOU / THEY DONT LIKE IT GO AWAY! WOULD YOU REMOVE UR TURBAN & BURKHA BECAUSE IT UPSETS ME, IF YOU AGREE POST THIS AS YOUR STATUS

Of course this story didn’t just crop up from anywhere, it based around a news article that featured in The Sun, although it took a right-wing, Nationalism, Nick Griffin turn by the time the story made it’s way to Facebook.

From the article featured in The Sun;
---------------
Killjoy cops have urged landlords to bar anyone wearing a Three Lions top.

They want to avoid a repeat of violence which has marred previous events, particularly if England lose.

But one patriotic fan said yesterday: "We often hear of a loss of pride in Britain, now cops want to ban the England shirt.

"It's like saying anyone who wears one is a yob."

The advice comes in a letter from the Metropolitan Police to pubs in Croydon, South London.
Among World Cup guidance, it suggests "dress code restrictions - eg no football shirts".

It also urges using plastic glasses and door staff.

Pubs are not obliged to follow the advice, but it warns: "Police will not hesitate to use powers under the Licensing Act should we find you are not actively supporting the prevention of crime."
Other forces could follow, but licensees' spokesman Bill Sharp said: "The World Cup should be a chance for people to enjoy the football in the pub." The Met said: "These are suggestions to make pubs safer."

------------------

Dissection of this article;

“Pubs are not obliged to follow the advice”
It’s not a fucking law. Police can’t stop you from wearing a football shirt. You’re a fucking idiot if you thought this was possible. This is not yet a police state in which law stop people from wearing football shirts. It’s just that football shirts are often linked to violence. I’m willing to bet plenty of shopping centres are advised against letting in youths wearing hoodies, but nobody attempts to start a right-wing Facebook group on their behalf.

“It also urges using plastic glasses and door staff.”
Clearly this is advice to stop violence occurring in the pub, I can’t understand how at some point this simple advice has turned into people blaming the Islamic community or other minorities.

Dissection of the Facebook post:

POLICE ARE GOING AROUND PUBS AND CLUBS SAYING THAT WE CANT WEAR OUR ENGLAND TOPS 4 THE FOOTIE & GOTTA TAKE THE FLAGS DOWN AS IT IS UPSETTING THE PEOPLE THAT DONT COME FROM HERE !!NOW IM NOT RACIST , BUT THIS IS TAKING THE FUCKING PISS! THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND WE NEED 2 MAKE A STAND IF YOU / THEY DONT LIKE IT GO AWAY! WOULD YOU REMOVE UR TURBAN & BURKHA BECAUSE IT UPSETS ME, IF YOU AGREE POST THIS AS YOUR STATUS

The first thing I notice about this is that the grammar is terrible, now I often make mistakes when typing, but I’m one person, it’s hard to pick up on your own mistakes when reading over what you’ve written. Although people have been copying and pasting this over and over again, yet nobody took the time to make the correct amendments;

“THE PEOPLE THAT DONT COME FROM HERE !!NOW IM NOT RACIST , BUT THIS”

Should be written;

“THE PEOPLE THAT DON’T COME FROM HERE! NOW I’M NOT RACIST, BUT THIS”

There’s plenty more mistakes, but you’re probably clever enough to spot them.

Let me just point out that; THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MUSLIMS, like the above post has been leading people to think. If we all just take a minute to look over it we may be able to figure that out using a little thing called logic.

“POLICE ARE GOING AROUND PUBS AND CLUBS SAYING THAT WE CANT WEAR OUR ENGLAND TOPS 4 THE FOOTIE & GOTTA TAKE THE FLAGS DOWN AS IT IS UPSETTING THE PEOPLE THAT DONT COME FROM HERE !!”

If we stick with the theme of the post we get the feeling that Police are we can’t wear football shirts in pubs because they offend Muslims. Of course we already know that Police are only advising against the wearing of shirts from the article. Yet the thing that seems most perplexing is the fact that Muslims want them removing because they are offensive, of course when we use that ‘logical thinking’, we come to the point in which we ask; “Why? Why would Muslims be offended by this when they are barely ever in clubs and pubs, after all it’s against their religion to drink alcohol.”

NOW IM NOT RACIST , BUT THIS IS TAKING THE FUCKING PISS! THIS IS OUR COUNTRY AND WE NEED 2 MAKE A STAND IF YOU / THEY DONT LIKE IT GO AWAY!

The immortal words; “Now I’m not racist”, always drawn out as a precursor to something racist. Of course as I’ve already argued there are no people being massively offended by what happens in a pub, apart from the police, worried about violence between England fans. “This is our country,” if you’re not being racist why do you label England our (as in the white population) country, it’s no more yours than theirs.

WOULD YOU REMOVE UR TURBAN & BURKHA BECAUSE IT UPSETS ME,

Now, I’m not a massive fan of religion, it does cause problems, yet at the same time it does plenty of good. And all the major religions are old and stooped in tradition, so the thought of comparing a football shirt with a piece of religious artefact is preposterous. Religion is often a study of the way to live your life, football is a bunch of overpaid individuals kicking a ball around. There is a massive difference.

I also struggle to see how an England shirt can cause offence. If people are offended by something that represents England, they must spend their days going slowly insane, seeing things that represent Britishness; Fish & Chip shops, rugby shirts, cups of Tea, red telephone boxes, red letter boxes, bulldogs, pregnant teenage girls … These things are inescapable.
So to some up; this advice to ban football shirts from pubs is all to do with that favourite British past-time; hooliganism.

The fact is people drown out in there masses to pubs, get pissed out their faces and when England eventually lose they start smashing shit up and acting like a complete cunt. Nothing to do with Muslims what-so-ever, they’re simply being used as a scapegoat again and people still fall for it.

Kiss, Tell, Proceed to Hell

Celebrities’ cheating on their wives was happening before the Big Bang, yet the public’s interest in them is still alive today somehow, just like the Queen. John Terry, Ashley Cole and Tiger Woods have all been slated in the newspapers recently for shagging females of the species that they didn’t buy an expensive ring for. This of course is a massive injustice. These gentlemen have worked extremely hard to make it to the top of their respective sports, while their wives have just got a free ride all the way.

Cheryl Cole, of course did have some-type of pop career before wedding Ashley. But cast your mind back to when she was a racist alcoholic. You can barely remember that because marrying Ashley altered that perspective of her, so while the tabloids poison your mind to hate Ashley now, if it wasn’t for him, there would have never been Cheryl on X-Factor, she’d still be beating up toilet assistants in an alcoholic rage while spouting racial slurs that would make Nick Griffin blush.

It’s not fair to blame these men for their actions because at the end of the day they are simply men. What’s the difference between men and women? Men have penises, which play heavily on the decisions they make. It’s that simple. These men have no control over what they did, the blames lays on the fact they have penises! You can’t blame them for the way they were born, that’s sexist, and I’m against sexism. I can reveal who the blame lays with in all of these cases; their wives and the women they fucked.

Firstly the wives of these men are all attractive, as these men have lots of money, the more money you have, the better looking your wife is, it’s that simple. Yet, clearly these women weren’t satisfying their husbands’ needs, so they have to go elsewhere for attention. These women get everything they need in life and all they have to do is suck a dick or sit on a face, to keep their man happy, yet they can’t do that! But if these pampered-up, spoilt bitches not do it someone else will …

Secondly the blame lays with these women that the sports stars sleep with, for the purpose of this we’ll call them ‘whores’. These whores know full well that these gentlemen have families at home, yet they still go ahead and sleep with them, well aware that they are ruining a marriage. My beef with these kiss and tell girls is that they never come under fire from the press. Jaimee Grubbs (Woods), Vicki Gough (Cole) or Vanessa Perroncel (Terry) didn’t get blamed for being home-wreckers.

It’s infuriating that these women do this; sleep with someone famous and go and sell the story. Oxford English (Mini) Dictionary reads;

Prostitute n. a person who has sex for payment.

Which is what these women are, yet the payment doesn’t come from the men directly, instead it comes from tabloids, each willing to throw money at these colossal skanks in an attempt to shift a couple more papers. Look at Vanessa Perroncel; she went directly to Max Clifford, who pimped her out like the whore she is for the highest price.

I thought women were meant to look out for each other, instead of stabbing each other in the back … although in these cases it more to do with letting another woman’s husband stab you in the front. Would it be that difficult for them to say; “No, I won’t have sex with you! You have a family!”? I mean, some of these girls act as if they had nothing to do with the whole thing, like it just so happened that a penis fell into them and it’s all the fault of the penis-owner, because it’s not like their legs were open, it’s not like they have any control of what choices they make. They’re not men, they don’t think with their dicks, they think with their brains, and what’s the thought; “I could probably get some money for swallowing this. Glug, glug, glug!” That’s Prostitution 101, a whore’s ideology.

The pure existence of these conniving wenches makes the possibility of affairs hard on the rich, under-sexed sport star. Knowing that you can’t just pick up some girl at a bar and shag her, because the story penetrates the headlines faster than you penetrated her the night before could lead numerous sports stars to not even bother with cheating on their wives. Because of this I have come up with a technique that sports stars can use in order to assure that they can go about their affairs without a trouble in the world;

What you want to do is get your girl (easy enough, you’re rich and famous – they flock to you like flies to shit). Take her to your room. Set up a video camera (wait, although this confirms evidence of what happened it won’t incriminate you). Do your business. But make sure you capture on film the girl knelt in front of you, while you over her masturbating, as you look down on her get her to spout anti-Semitic bile as you proceed to slap her with your cock, calling her a “bad girl”, repeatedly. You then take the tape and lock it away in a safety deposit box and threaten the girl that if a single word is ever uttered about that night you spent together, that tape will makes its way to her parent’s house. Yet if she still goes to the newspapers you produce the videotape and explain that you have been conducting an experiment in which you are attempting to discover if your penis can cure racism.

It’s that simple.

In a world where everyone should be treated equal, isn’t it time that we labelled these ‘kiss and tell girls’ what they really are; prostitutes. Isn’t prostitution illegal in this country? Shouldn’t these women be held up in court? At the end of the day, they are having sex for money. Yet, the sport stars aren’t the one paying the bill, it’s the tabloids. Should we question the tabloids hold over these women? This celebrity driven society, in which newspapers are able to put forward an ideology in which it’s acceptable for females to sleep with married men, as a way to sell a story to further line the pockets of newspaper owners, no matter how many lives are ruined in the aftermath. For us readers it’s something to look at and gossip about for a couple of minutes, for the ones involved it never ends, but next week we’re reading about the next footballer that’s been fucking around, literally. Yet, what about last weeks headliner? That’s old news to us now, fuck him and his failed marriage, bring on the next two-timing cunt and hoe-bag that’d lick a homeless man’s nuts for a couple of copper coins, parade them on the front page and let us ogle at their disgraceful actions, then fuck them off and bring us someone else. Our shitty relationships seem imperial to theirs and they’re rich. Hooray for us.

5 Reasons for Mrs. Cameron to Have an Abortion

Yesterday I read a news article (get me!) that proclaimed that the wife of David Cameron is pregnant. So, due to the fact I want to seem as if I’m on the pulse of current news topics and give the overall impression that I can be topical on this Blog, I decided to put together a list of reasons of why Samantha Cameron should abort that little bundle of joy promptly. For those that don’t know ‘SamCam’ (as some newspapers deem her, although to me SamCam sounds likes a porno-star’s website that features a live sex show broadcast via their webcam) and the evil one (David Cameron) have had three children already; Ivan Reginald Ian, Nancy Gwen and Arthur Elwen. Three children that have the combination of seven names! Although Ivan Reginald Ian died, so now they have two children that have the combination of four names.

1 – No Father Figure
Although sick slowly creeps up my throat as I write this; it is extremely possible that David Cameron will win the next election. This is going to make him an extremely busy man, the NHS isn’t just going to privatise itself you know! Therefore he’s not going to be around to help raise this child. If a child doesn’t have a father figure then it grows up unguided, into being a cynical bastard that writes hateful Blogs about people he/she doesn’t know, just for attention … so I heard somewhere.

2 – One Less Tory
I think we all can agree that The Conservatives are cunts. Yet, in a little over 18 years this foetus that is currently growing in SamCam will have the ability to vote, and who do you think it will vote for? Daddies group of friends, of course. It is important to stop people voting Tory early on in life, and what is possibly earlier than abortion? Stopping the conception of a Tory-baby is the only action that can be taken earlier than abortion, but that is extremely difficult. So one abortion = one less vote for The Conservatives, its simple maths.

3 – The Photo-Op Tot
Lets face facts here, if this little bugger is born it will receive the best education money has to offer, the kind of education that is so far beyond what any of us received we can’t even imagine the intricate details discussed as it would blow our minds right open and brain matter would ooze down our backs. The thing is, one day this child is going to put two and two together and realise that the only reason it was conceived was as a ploy to get votes. Of course growing up to become Tory scum it is likely that the child will come to this conclusion and say; “Father, I have been deep in thought about my conception and have come to the conclusion that the only legitimate reason for my existence to come about was for you to garner more votes at the 2010 election. I must say this was an excellent idea on your part, old chap. What a brilliant way to deceit the voters into selecting The Conservative Party. Heil Thatcher!” Although the opposite is also possible, if the child grows up and is able to keep in touch with its emotions (rare for most Conservatives I know, but it’s probable) and then comes to this conclusion, the child could become so distraught by this fact that it could commit suicide, as it’s life means nothing and it was simply a pawn on the chessboard of political one-up-man-ship. That’s no life for a child! Best to end it now with an abortion, before this horror unfolds.

4 – Over-Population
This kind of connects to something I’ve been thinking about for a while. Basically to get us out of this economic gloom I believe that couples (and slutty girls) should be limited to the amount of children they have in order for the country to get back on track. [This will be discussed at further length in an upcoming Blog … so I’ll convince you then]

5 – This Child could be the Anti-Christ
I firmly believe that when/if the Anti-Christ is conceived it will be by the seed of a Tory. Now I’m not too hot on my Biblical scripture but I do believe the Apocalypse reads like this;

“The world shall come to its end when the tides begin to rise. The Anti-Christ will be conceived on the Eve of an Election by a loyal servant of the Devil. The loyal servant will be congratulated for his role with a position of power, with this he will bring about a reign of terror across the lands. Blood will run through the streets, house prices will go up, the poor shall be slaughtered as offering to Satan. Then the Anti-Christ shall be born, slicing its carrier in two, the Anti-Christ will then feed upon the body of its mother. The loyal servant will pass down the power to the Anti-Christ, upon this happening the Anti-Christ will proclaim; ‘The End is nign, it’s time to motherfuckin’ die!’ And the world shall be engulfed by hell.”

… or something like that. It’s best not to take a chance and abort it now if you ask me.