“What’s a ‘daily mail’?” asks Harriet Harman

by philapilus

Really? You’re REALLY actually going to take this on?

The deputy Labour leader has today asked someone to explain to her what the Daily Mail is, after it transpired she clearly doesn’t have the first clue about what Paul Dacre’s newspaper does.

The Mail had attacked Harman, for having some tenuous link, through the National Council for Civil Liberties, with the despicable Paedophile Information Exchange, a group which campaigned for ‘kiddyfiddlers’ rights’ in the 1970s.

Ms Harman said “Whatever this Daily Mail thing is, they should apologise, and put an end to what seems to be some sort of deliberate smear campaign. Such rudeness and deliberate character assassination is unheard of in the British press.”

However, given the infinite impossibility of the Daily Mail ever apologising, or indeed stopping a smear campaign, experts have suggested that Ms Harman has either “had her head up her own arse since forever”, “is entering an unwinnable war against the most gratuitously malignant newspaper in the history of journalism” or indeed that she “may have entered a psychotically delusional state”.

Professor Hamish McEyebrau of the Slough Institute for Studying Stupidity, said “Actually, it’s probably all of the above.”

Paul Dacre impaled a newborn baby on each of the horns protruding from his forehead, and spoke in a voice like a thunderous serpent; “NEVERRRRR, NEVERRRR WILL DACRE APOLOGISSSSSSSE!


Professor McEyebrau said “The problem could be that it looks like most of the country was one giant paedophile in the 1970s. Or it could be that the Daily Mail is a hideous cesspit of cuntish evil. Or it could even be that Harman was a cowardly, power-grasping moron, with all the personality of a decomposed trout.

“Actually, it’s probably all of the above.”

%d bloggers like this: