Most of us have reached the stage where we're used to tabloid newspapers undertaking the sort of 'investigations' which would make the majority of people shiver and stab themselves before undertaking. Mark Reckons has alerted me to a new such depth undertaken by The Sun following their use of a grieving mother to attack their former buddy, Gordon Brown.
It's a pity that Rupert Murdoch does hold such power in deciding who runs this country because alas the grasp of politics, science and general knowledge by the vast majority of journalists is very slight. Cheers all round to the ones who have to wikipedia the so called 'celebrities' they are often told to write about, even if it does add to the time taken to finish the 'story'. Opinion revolves around who the editors are friends with and which bit they know about, because of course the press don't monitor the parliamentary chamber where most of our laws are debated or spend much time outside their protective bubble.
To sink to attacking the children of a man who was sacked by our Orwellian government for having an opinion is stinking, putrid detritus and also hypocritical since I know of many a hack working for News Int who themselves drunk before the age of 18, have admitted to taking drugs and have no problem with removing their clothes.
I don't object to them doing any of that naturally, it's the fact that they choose to preach and judge people for doing the same thing for no other reason than they work for a newspaper organisation which is too scared to have a debate on the legalisation of drugs. Why? Surely everyone has been told at some point that alcohol and tobacco would be class A should they be made illegal and yet there appears to be no outcry as they trip down to the subsidised bar or have a smoke on the terrace.
I will assume that this didn't come from the political team themselves given one or two of their opinions on these dastardly illegal substances as they, would you believe, are definitely more sensible than the view that not so esteemed organ chooses to take.
This last bit made me snort with derision:
He also came up with one of his trademark far-out theories - accusing us of bribing a pal to send in a picture of him smoking a roll-up ciggie
One, that looks very much like a normal roll up to me and two, I hardly think that paying people for leaking them stories is in any way 'far out' unless 'far out' now means 'accurate'.
I for one have been approached to do the same thing. I don't happen to store photographs of people smoking roll ups, though. But it's a reason why my facebook profile has quite high security settings.
If Mr Coles is suggesting that Master Nutt is slightly deranged with his concept of 'far out' theories I wonder if there's a legal suit winging it's way Wapping-Wards?