Experts condemn proposed ‘arsehole tests’ for MPs

Proposed tests to check if MPs are talking out of their arseholes would be “invasive, humiliating and inconclusive”, according to the British Society of Proctologists.

The proposal came after Conservative MP David Davies called for dental tests to check the ages of child refugees, a demand that onlookers said seemed to come from the vicinity of Mr Davies’ anus.

Michael Mola, a dentist from Otley, said: “I’m not an expert on that end of the body, but Davies definitely seemed to be talking through his mudchute. I demand an immediate examination of all Members of Parliament.

“Some might say that invasively testing the fudgetunnel of every single MP on the basis of just my opinion would be massively unethical and inappropriate.

“But MPs are a fairly small group, demonised by the press. So collectively humiliating them all based on a few crass, uninformed generalisations would probably get strong public support.”

Proctologists are “vehemently opposed” to the proposed test, which would involve a microphone being inserted into the rectum of every Member of Parliament.

MPs would then be asked whether refugees from war-torn hellholes could be temporarily housed in one of their spare homes. The MPs’ embarrassed excuses would be recorded and tested to see which orifice they came from.

Mr Davies’ original demand for child refugee testing, roundly condemned by dentists, was believed to be inspired by jealousy of his near-namesake David Davis.

A Westminster insider said “Everyone knows David Davis as ‘that lying Brexit prick’. No-one had heard of David Davies, but now we all know him as ‘that braying prick who bullies orphaned refugees’. Publicity-wise, it’s a tremendous result for him.”

Tour de France to be ‘livened up’ with weapons

Tour de France organisers are set to spice up next year’s race by allowing riders a choice of medieval weaponry.

Defending champion Chris Froome has reportedly already selected a jousting lance, while his rivals Nairo Quintana and Adam Yates have chosen a spiked mace and a Mongolian horsebow respectively.

Pierre Velo of the Tour’s organising committee explained: “Our current audience is mostly hardcore cycling fans, and we want to expand our reach.

“Market research shows that the most popular clips of the race are those with crashes and serious injuries, so by allowing riders these tools of death we’re just delivering what the public want.”

A spokesman for Team Wingèd Vengeance (formerly Team Sky) said: “Riders know that it’s a dangerous sport, and they come into the Tour knowing they risk serious injury.

“That risk has increased somewhat, with the added element of a bloody wheel-to-wheel deathmatch, but our riders are determined to rise to the challenge and slaughter the opposition without mercy.”

Monsieur Velo said that the new rules were partly aimed at combating the scourge of drugs in cycling:

“At the moment, spectators are taking vast amounts of drugs just to try and make the race seem interesting.

“It’s 200 identical men riding identical bikes around for five hours every day for weeks on end. No-one can possibly watch that without being off their tétons.

“Arming the riders with lethal weaponry will bring back a sense of wholesome fun to the Tour, without the need for chemical enhancement.”

If the addition of weapons to the Tour are successful, Formula One is considering a similar rule change next season, aimed at bringing motorsport to the Mario Kart generation.

Smith and Eagle to form “Smeagle” alliance

Former Labour leadership candidate Angela Eagle has announced she is to join forces with Owen Smith and campaign together under the name ‘Smeagle’.

Political analyst Andrew Marragorn said: “It’s an epic tale.

“Smeagle is driven by a burning desire to retrieve the Labour leadership, which has accidentally ended up in the hands of a mild-mannered hobbit called Bilbo Corbins.

“Corbins is one of the little people – he was never supposed to wield power like this, and he doesn’t know how to control it.

At a press conference, Eagle said: “As Smeagle, we will retain two distinct voices. Owen will frolic around gaining people’s trust, being suspiciously friendly and telling everyone what they want to hear.

“I will sneak around in the darkness, doing underhand things like registering campaign websites several days before I regretfully resign on principle.”

Eagle then hissed at the four journalists who had actually turned up, before crouching on the floor, eating a fish and muttering “fifth collum, collum, collum”.

Smith and Eagle hope to unite the centre and right wings of the Labour party under the slogan “One wing to rule them all”, while protecting the leadership from both the Dark Lord Blairon and the bloodthirsty creatures of Mor-mentum.

Should Smeagle’s campaign to unseat Corbins prove unsuccessful, a concession speech is already believed to have been drafted:

“The precious! The Corbins stole it from us! Thief! Thief! We hates it forever!!!”

The Trident debate: a brief introduction to the nuclear deterrent

Nuclear weapons have a unique ability to divide people. Specifically, they have the ability to divide people into lots of much-smaller bits of people. And when it comes to the renewal of the UK’s nuclear weapons systems, opinion is split much the same way as the atom was first split a century ago – violently, recklessly, and with no-one really thinking too hard about the consequences.

In Westminster, the Conservatives and a significant proportion of the Labour party have voted in favour of replacing the submarines that carry the UK’s Trident nukes, arguing that giving up our weapons would be like bringing a knife to a gun fight. The SNP, Plaid Cwmry and the remainder of the Labour party, including Jeremy Corbyn, oppose renewing the nuclear subs. They say that keeping nukes is more like bringing a tiger to a gunfight. Expensive, unnecessary, and guaranteed to end up with everybody dead.

Corbyn has even said that if he were Prime Minister he would never use nukes, even in self-defence. This makes some sense – the only time he might use them would be if we were all effectively dead anyway – but it slightly undermines the concept of a deterrent. It’d be like telling a naughty child “If you don’t behave right now, I swear I will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!”

Renewing Trident could now cost anything from 40bn to £205bn – campaigners say this money could pay for 120 hospitals and 150,000 new nurses, or 1.5m affordable homes. Alternatively, if we wanted a genuine deterrent to foreign powers, we could spend the money on a magnificent 800-metre high golden statue of a nude and priapic Michael Gove to stand proudly on the white cliffs of Dover.

Cost has been an issue from the beginning of the British nuclear programme. In the early 1950s, rationing was still in effect in the UK, and some questioned how we could justify spending vast sums of public money on doomsday weapons we never intended to use, at a time when citizens were queuing in the streets for food. Of course, everything is completely different today.

Safety of nuclear weapons is another concern, after decades of fires, crashes and dropped clangers. Barely a week seems to have gone by in the 1950s without some hapless GI wheeling a city-incinerating missile to a plane while whistling the Laurel and Hardy theme tune in giddy anticipation of some top-notch slapstick.

In the early days, the computers controlling global nuclear stockpiles had slightly less processing power than a modern-day electric toothbrush. Likewise, the soldiers guarding the warheads also seem to have had slightly less common sense than a modern-day electric toothbrush.

The UK no longer conducts nuclear testing, after controversial early British nuclear experiments in Australia threw up large amounts of radioactive dust. This was the only time in history that Australians were ever unhappy after welcoming a team of Englishmen for a series of tests and getting to keep the ashes afterwards.

Today, the UK’s nuclear threat is submarine-based, making it hard for enemies to detect or target our weapons. In fact, they are so difficult to detect that in 2009 a British nuclear-armed submarine crashed into a French one in the middle of the Atlantic. The government described this as an isolated incident and, to be fair, you can’t get much more isolated than floating around in the middle of an empty ocean and still managing to crash into something else that’s also carrying nuclear warheads.

Despite incidents like this, the navy are seen as reliable custodians for our nuclear arsenal. Because if we must amass world-destroying weapons, who could be better emotionally suited to control them than someone trapped for months in a claustrophobic tin can, traversing a hostile environment without contact from the outside world? What could possibly go wrong?

Bringing us back to the present, the main purpose of today’s vote was not really about a debate. It was about embarrassing an unstable Labour party on the verge of meltdown.

The Conservatives are taking a leaf out of Ernest Rutherford’s book from a century ago. By firing a stream of charged emotions at a wafer-thin sheet of consensus, they hope to successfully split the Labour party. The chain reaction could drastically alter the political environment, and the poisonous fallout could take years to clean up.

Young people investigate possibility of rejoining EU ‘when all the old bastards are dead’

People under 40, who overwhelmingly supported remaining in the EU, are today looking into the possibility of rejoining Europe ‘once all the old bastards are dead’.

Younger voters were much less likely to vote Leave, meaning they now face an isolated future they rejected, chosen for them by angry, frightened older people who won’t be around to see it.

Young person, Chantelle Wilkins (19), said: “It’s, like, totally unfair, y’know?”

“We already know what old people think about people from ethnic minorities. It’s why my boyfriend will never meet my grandma.

“Old people have given us a future we don’t want, but they’ll be long gone before Andrea Leadsom has even opened her first concentration camp.

“We’re going to have to wait ‘til the old people are all dead, then have a word with the EU to see if they’d take us back.”

Ms Wilkins added: “Honestly, it makes me wish I’d got round to actually voting. Only it was wet outside and I didn’t have the right shoes, and I wanted to watch Love Island to see who got tossed off. Tossed off the show, I mean! Hahahaha! Ha?”

Gleeful old bastard Ernest Grumbler (87) said: “This result is bloomin’ marvellous.

“I was fed up seeing all these young, happy types enjoying freedom of movement while I can’t bend down to tie my shoelaces.

“Then there’s all the foreigners, they’ve either got too many vowels in their names or not enough. It was time to do something about them.

“Now I intend to hang around a couple more years and enjoy watching everything go properly to shit, then I’ll die just before they send all my care workers back to Poland.

“I’m just happy I’ve finally got my country back. Though I’ve already put it down somewhere and can’t remember where I left it.”

Biblical prophecy ‘predicted rise of Leadsom’

A prophecy found in a medieval English Bible appears to have predicted the rise of Andrea Leadsom to Prime Minister.

The section, inserted in between several particularly gruesome bits of smiting reads:

“3 And lo! From obscurity shall a LEADER emerge, and her name shall be LEAD-SOME.

“4 She will be the anointed one, chosen by the aged and the homophobic from the Wells of Tunbridge to lead her people to freedom from the slavery of EUROPE.”

“5 And the WAVES shall part, and she shall lead her people across the Atlantic to a promised land of low wages, tax avoidance and Christian dogma.

“6 Oh, and foxhunting, for some reason.

“7 And there shall be slapping of foreheads and a time of great facepalming in the land.”

Bible scholars have expressed scepticism over the find. Reverend Ben Bland said: “It seems like a crock frankly.

“Even six months ago, imagine suggesting that by the end of 2016 we’d be leaving Europe, steered by the safe hands of Prime Minister Andrea Bloody Leadsom. It would have been laughable.

“And someone supposedly predicted it centuries back? I’m not having it.

“I mean, Leadsom could have her nasty, judgemental finger pointed at the nuclear button by autumn. The Good Lord’s taken his eye off the ball, frankly.”

The controversial passage goes on to talk about seven seals opening and some horsemen appearing, but it’s probably nothing to worry about.

Blair ‘tried everything to avoid war, except not doing a war’

Tony Blair’s former spin doctor Alastair Campbell has defended his old boss against accusations of warmongering.

Mr Campbell said: “I was one of the few people who saw the process of his making the decision close up…

“Far from seeing someone hellbent on war, I saw someone doing all he could to avoid it.”

Speaking through a spirit medium, the restless souls of a million dead Iraqis issued a response:

“We note with interest Mr Campbell’s suggestion that Mr Blair tried everything to avoid war.

“Did he at any point consider just not doing a war?

“The leaders of France, Denmark, New Zealand and Bhutan, for example, managed to avoid war by not doing a war.

“Even Germany managed to not do a war, and that’s not always a given, historically speaking.

“As his close advisor, did you ever think to say ‘We could always just not do a war, Tony’?

“What? Oh. Wooooooooo!!!”

Mr Campbell did not respond to the terrifying moans of the unavenged dead.

A source close to the former spin doctor said: “Alastair has managed to shut out the screams of dead Iraqis from his every haunted dream these last 13 years.

“He’s not about to start listening to them now.”


I’ve neglected this site for a while, so apologies to the literally millions* who check it every day looking for my wit and wisdom.

I’m going to go through and add a few bits and pieces I’ve written in the last few months. A lot of these are pieces I wrote and submitted to spoof news sites, so I’ll backdate them to when they were written.

Other bits I’ll add as and when.

As you were.

*of atoms, on average, occasionally adding up to a whole human being on a given day.

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?”