Chilcotte report criticises Richard the Lionheart

Richard the Lionheart has been strongly criticised by the Chilcotte Report into the Third Crusade.

Sir John Chilcotte’s report, which has taken 820 years to produce and runs to 436,000 sheets of parchment, says King Richard failed to make a case for invasion.

“There was no evidence to support Richard’s claim that Saladin was building a ‘bloody massive catapult’ in the desert,” the report states.

“There was, however, plenty of evidence to show that the Crusade was a preconceived war of aggression, for example in the Pope’s announcement: ‘How’s about a Holy War to kill all the Muslims, huh? Benedictus Benedicat, yee-haw!'”

Chilcotte also criticises Richard for not preparing for the Crusade’s aftermath,  and the Middle East’s inevitable descent into eight centuries of interfaith slaughter.

Campaigner Julia Scones welcomed the report on behalf of her anti-war ancestor, Egbert the Muckraker.

“This report vindicates everything Egbert was saying, it’s just a tragedy he died a mere eight centuries before it was published.

“Egbert had such a big heart. We know this because it was ripped, still-beating from his chest by an angry mob denouncing him as a traitor to King and God.”

Others are angry that the report took so long to produce. Dave Jenkins’ ancestor Geoffrey the Massive Target was killed by an arrow during the siege of Jaffa.

Dave said: “Geoffrey died over 800 years ago. How can it have taken this long to find out why?

“Of course King Richard will get away scot free, having been dead for centuries. I’m sorry, it’s hard to talk about this. Is there, err, is there any chance of compensation?”

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s