Vatican Black Smoke Now Racist Issue

With this morning’s ‘Enhanced Bullshit’ edition we bring you the latest and greatest in scandal-mongering hot gossip from Anarchy Central’s 24/7 Truth & Rumour Mill – with dispatches hand forged and crafted into bespoke satire to tempt the palates of all budding nihilists and career revolutionaries who carry the immortal bloodline of the rebel sons of Belial.

In what has got to be a source of acute embarrassment for New Labour’s pro-Zionist wunderkind leader Ed Milliped and his opposition party cohorts, David Lammy, their intellectually-challenged MP for turbulent Tottenham (London’s gun crime / riot moshpit Central) dropped a major bollock on Twitter when he read a BBC’s correspondent’s post from Rome speculating on the Cardinal’s election conclave result: “Will the smoke be black or white?”

Not only failing to engage brain before ‘tweeting’ a knee jerk reply and revealing his total lack of knowledge for European history or Catholic papal election protocols, the moronic Lammy responded with an irate “This tweet from the Beeb is crass and unnecessary. Do we really need silly innuendo about the race of the next Pope?”

(To wit, prior to the election of the Argentinean Peronist / Jesuit ‘Men in Black’ Pontiff, Jorge Mario Buggerroffi, there had been wild speculation that Cardinal Turkey Chuckabutty of Ghana or the Muslim Cardinal Al Haji N’Dinga bin Jaffacake of Nigeria could become the first black Pope of the modern era).

Really, you couldn’t make this shit up if you tried. Where the fuck do the New Labour crowd get these people? Do they simply shake the trees or drag them out of caves – or recruit any NEET Asbo they see loitering in a bus shelter with a can of Meths Breezer and a smart phone – and as long as they have a minimum educational qualification of an NVQ1 in Advanced Welfare Benefit Fraud, then they’re Parliamentary material?

So Lammy, a pantomime politician with the IQ of a small potted plant, makes the Monty Pythonesque whacky news section, and comes across as obviously being yet another well-balanced coloured chap – with a large chip of each shoulder -and ready to take paranoid offence at any comment that mentions race, creed or colour – and here failed to engage brain (or whatever passes for one in his case) before opening gob and issuing a stream of condemnation regarding the BBC employing Italian racist xenophobes.
Hmmm, thank fuck it was the Catholics and not the Flat Earthers, Rastafarians, Scientologists or the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

For those who need a better ‘feel’ for MP Lammy, this is a man who defended coming top of the House of Conmans expenses list in the last year – as the gospel according to data from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, Lammy claimed £173,922.06 quid of taxpayer’s money for the 2011 / 2012 period – almost twice as much as any of the other 648 bottom feeding scumbags.

Former Tottenham councillor Fellattia Titwank, who is standing to be the Lib-Dum's candidate for the Landfill Hamlets constituency at the forthcoming by-election, queried why Lammy’s expense claims were so much higher than those of every other fucker and their dog – adding for sarcasm effect: “The question that the people of Tottenham have got to ask themselves regarding Mr Lammy is this – are they getting value for money?”

Hmmm, in light of the black / white smoke issue, then obviously not. Lammy’s obviously a Poundland quality Parliamentary representative and Ed Millipede and Co need to do better.

Allergy warning: This article was written in a known propaganda-infested area and may contain traces of slight exaggeration, modest porkies, misaligned references and lashings of bush telegraph innuendo.

Rusty’s Skewed News Views (Purveyors of Bespoke Satire) - enhanced with a modest touch of Yeast Logic and a piquant dash of Political Incorrectness: a newsheet and media source not owned by Rupert Murdoch and the Masonic Zionist kikester lobby, committed to the relay of open source information – and immune from litigation under the statutes of the ‘Fair Comment in the Public Interest’ defence.