A new low for Littlejohn?
Please, please, please, don't give the odious buttock any more website traffic than he deserves. Here is his latest piece of flamebaitery...
Actually, I don't think this is the worst thing Littlejohn's ever done. The 'spare me the people's prostitute routine' stuff about the Ipswich murder victims was appalling; the use of "Rue des Jeunes Garcons" in a spoof piece about Peter Mandelson, implying he likes little boys, was truly terrible; the lie about Afghans going straight to the top of the housing list instead of soldiers was a straightforward piece of mendacity without any comic value whatsoever. This is just a bad joke. Much like Littlejohn's entire career. (Sure, you and I don't get upwards of £700k a year for making bad jokes.)
But I don't find it miserably offensive. Just par for the course. Not a new low; just the usual low standards. I suppose if you don't read Littlejohn much, it sticks out as something appalling; but believe me, this is fairly ordinary fare. Some bloke in a wheelchair, so he must be Andy from Little Britain. Tedious linking; tedious comedy reference; tediously unfunny joke.
Seeing as Littlejohn was cheerfully let off the hook for entirely falsely claiming that 'any Afghan clinging to the bottom of a lorry' would go straight to the top of the housing list, I wouldn't hold out much hope for PCC complaints either. Not that I'm telling you not to complain, if it's offended you, mind. Incidents like this bring the awfulness of Littlejohn and chums into the wider audience beyond the slavering dogs who lap up his garbage every week, so it's no bad thing in raising awareness of what a nasty piece of work he is. But I will say this: he'll probably love the attention, and being attacked by 'lefties'.
He will love it.
No related posts.
Buy my book, it’s great
Switch site
Donate
Recent Posts
Most Commented On
Recent Comments
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on A day with the Daily Mail
- Eddie on Peter Hitchens depresses me. But I won’t kill him.
- Emily on Update
- Angela Webb on This isn’t a flounce
About Me
Hello. I'm a Bristol-based writer and soon-to-be-redundant journalist. You can read more about me and the Enemies site here, or follow me on Twitter. Email me if you like - antonvowl at live dot co dot uk
If you're struggling to read the site please use the drop down box below to increase the text size.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:01
We should deny the twat the oxygen of publicity. And hope that his red-faced rage that someone, somewhere is receiving aid or assistance pushes him into anger-induced-heart-attack territory.
December 14th, 2010 - 16:16
To be honest denying him oxygen would be the best thing. He’s breathing air that more deserving folk could be breathing. Never mind the oxygen of publicity.
December 14th, 2010 - 16:34
We should deny the twat the oxygen of oxygen.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:04
So your headline is a question to which the answer is “No”?
You could work for the Daily Mail!
December 14th, 2010 - 14:15
You take that back!
December 14th, 2010 - 15:29
[MAIL HEADLINE] This leftwing troublemaker has gratuitously maligned the good name of crusading blogger Anton Vowl. So will thuggish troublemaker chrisleonmiller take back his vile insult?
December 14th, 2010 - 13:06
I’m so glad I have no idea who Littlejohn writes for because he is clearly a turd.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:10
amazing-just when I’d thought he’d reached the nadir of cuntness, he climbs several notches below it
December 14th, 2010 - 13:10
This is going to cause another Moir-style stir, just look at Twitter.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:11
Given the very limited scope of the PCC Code of Practice, I don’t see what line Littlejohn has crossed with this one. Caitlin Moran on Twitter said that she had complained under paragraphs 5(i) and 12(i). The first relates to intrusion into grief or shock, and I don’t see how that applies at all. The second relates to discrimination on grounds of (inter alia) disability. That’s more relevant, but I don’t think the piece is discriminatory about McIntyre’s disability.
However even if – great hope! – the PCC is disbanded and replaced by statutory regulation, I don’t see how Littlejohn’s piece could result in reprimand. It’s an opinion piece and he is entitled to say what he said, or even go further, eg “I’m glad the police gave him a hiding,” if he wants to. Most people will not agree with it, but he’s still entitled to say it. The only grounds for complaint would be if it was factually inaccurate in saying that McIntyre’s brother pushed him into the front line of the protests.
December 14th, 2010 - 15:26
I’ve been wondering the same. Littlejohn basically says that he doesn’t think McIntyre should have gone to the protests because of his disability; I don’t know if that counts as discriminatory, especially in an opinion piece. If he’d said he endorsed the apparently violent police action because “disableds” didn’t belong in a protest, that would be another matter.
It’s gratuitously provocative, lacking any kind of empathy and pretty vile (I know! A Littlejohn column!), but I am not sure it contravenes the PCC code. There is no clause saying “Journalists must not be horrible cunts”.
December 14th, 2010 - 15:57
Having said that I suppose the only reason he wrote it is because McIntyre is disabled, which is discriminatory. And he’s effectively accusing McIntyre of playing the disability card, which as well as missing the bigger picture is probably a “pejorative reference to… disability” (cf PCC Code clause 12i). Oh I don’t know.
Basically I’m not sure how this column is more or less hateful than any other Littlejohn piece.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:13
If only some of those lefties attacked him physically. With batons. Just like the police do to peaceful, perfectly legal protesters. That’s the only way he will understand what an utter arsehole he is.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:22
Actually, the main noticeable thing in this colomn is that Littlejohn’s comedy references have moved out of the 1980s. Still pathetic of course.
December 14th, 2010 - 13:58
How can a man keep writing that “Political Correctness has gone mad”, when he’s made a career of writing stuff like this without censure? Don’t his readers ever see through this?
December 14th, 2010 - 14:49
I think Littlejohn saying “if he’s looking for sympathy he’s come to the wrong place” is kind of redundant. There are about 6.7 billion people on earth for whom Littlejohn is the wrong place to go looking for sympathy.
December 14th, 2010 - 17:03
Whenever I see anything about Littlejohn these days, the phrase ‘don’t feed the troll’ springs to mind. And the unfortunate truth is, of course, that complaining won’t do any good and he’ll get to dance in spiteful glee when he inevitably gets let off.
December 14th, 2010 - 19:34
+1.
The Daily Mash has put it quite well:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/littlejohn-engorged-by-your-hate-201012143351/
December 15th, 2010 - 19:26
Cheers for the link, although I probably could’ve done without seeing the words ‘Littlejohn’ and ‘engorged’ in the same sentence. XD
December 14th, 2010 - 20:08
The joke in Little Britain is that Andy is not *really* disabled.
I wonder if he is even trying to imply the same about Jody?
If so it makes the whole piece even more sinister than it first looks.
December 15th, 2010 - 11:12
I honestly don’t think so. I’d be more inclined to believe that he’s seen Little Britain, but just hasn’t understood it. Still, it’s a step forward from blood-stoppingly dull references to Fawlty Towers and The Sweeney.
December 15th, 2010 - 21:40
Littlejohn is scum but he is not a complete idiot, he understands the joke perfectly well and is likely referring to the pictures of Jody McIntrye standing up without the aid of a wheelchair and trying to hit a police officer.
http://www.mitchell-images.com/#/jody-mcintyre/4546538655
December 17th, 2010 - 09:11
That complicates things for Jody’s case I would think, considering he said he was involved with the same officer earlier in the day in his BBC interview.
December 17th, 2010 - 09:18
sorry for the double post.
I was looking a bit more, presumably that is his brother in the first picture as it is different clothes? and it looks more like the woman is stoppping him from falling, rather than intervening in him hitting the policeman?
The commentary above the pictures is clearly opinionated against the demonstrators no?