Skip to content or view screen version

"Bollocks 2 Blair" needs to be clearly defined... please help!

Charity Sweet | 13.05.2007 18:12 | SOCPA | History | Repression | London

I have been reading up on "bollocks" and have found a variety of meanings and usages.

Back in the day, around 1000 A.D., it gave reference to a small ball. Later on, in the 18th century, it referred to a priest and cuz priests talk such shite, it gave further reference to the shite that priests spoke - bollocks... and the meaning of the word continued to grow to testicles and beyond...

It's 'the dog's bollocks' gives reference to a very good meaning. If the dog enjoys licking his bits so much, it must be good... so the story goes.

It's the 'bollocks' is just a shortened version of 'dog's bollocks'.

You can give someone a 'bollocking' - read a person their fortune - go up one side of them and down the other - verbally - 'a bollocking' is to tell someone clearly what you think that implies negative connotation.

'Bollocks' also gives clear reference specifically to 'testicles' with regards to the 'dog's bollocks'.

'It's a load of bollocks' also means 'it's a pile of shit'. Conversely, "It's the bollocks!" means something is really very good, see dog licking testicles. You have to love the English language and especially the British slang!

If someone were to 'bollocks up the job', that would mean to make a 'cock-up', a mistake

In reference to the Sex Pistols and their album... 'bollocks' means rubbish or nonsense. This case was won partially on the grounds that HRH Charlie is familiar with its varies usages in public and the good linguistic professor stated that surely, England would be a greater nation for the expression of 'bollocks' as opposed to the incarceration of those who would say 'bollocks.

In my research, I have found a young lady who was chastised at a fair for wearing a 'bollocks to blair' t-shirt, forced to cover up said t-shirt by police, and was apparently given a ticket on a public order offence section 5 for apparently causing the public harassment, alarm and distress - no charges laid.

Another gentleman elsewhere in England was also held to account under Public Order for his B2B t-shirts.

Apparently, this 'bollocks' has spread far and wide, over the countryside.

I am not the first person to say "Bollocks 2 Blair" and I doubt I will be the last, although the phrase might take a turn to "Bollocks 2 Brown". Same shite, different politician/liar/war-mongering lunatic/day.

The question remains... what does "Bollocks 2" mean?

As a Canadian with English parents, brought up on Benny Hill, the Two Ronnies and Monty Python, I think I have a fairly good idea and I am looking for some input from the public to add weight to my legal argument.

What does "Bollocks 2 Blair" mean to you?
How does it - "Bollocks 2" - translate into modern day English?

For example... "Bollocks 2" Blair could be replaced by the statement

Get stuffed Blair?
Nonsense to Blair / Blair is a nonsense?
Testicles to Blair?

I welcome any and all input from the English regarding this wonderfully useful slang term with so many variations, pretty please with sugar on top and two cherries!



Sincerely,

Charity XXX

P.S. I can't quite seem to find any words that could literally translate this statement
better than the term 'bollocks!'

N.B. While I have my own ideas, at present, my mind clearly wants to drift into vulgar language when thinking of Blair and his bollocks - "f*ck *ff c*nt" seems the most appropriate phrase for this asshole and his gag order on free speech - SOCPA sect.132-138.

Regardless, I am on the hunt for exactly what does "bollocks 2" mean to the average English Joe?

Charity Sweet
- e-mail: charitysweet@hotmail.co.uk

Comments

Hide the following 10 comments

Punk Night at the Duck's Nuts

13.05.2007 19:33

Check out Attila the Stockbroker on the question of bollocks. The track is titled "Punk NIght at the Duck's Nuts" and is probably available for download somewhere, or you could ask Attila to send you a copy. In fact, I've just found a great Alaskan independent radio station Whole Wheat Radio - see link - where I managed to request it and get it played in about 10 minutes:

I think the question here is whose bollocks are referred to in the phrase "Bollocks to Blair". If you argue that the testicles in question belonged to a dog or a duck, then an accurate translation might be 'Good things to Blair', which is a pretty generous remark, all things considered.

Otherwise, I think that the Sex Pistols caselaw says it all.

bliar's babe
- Homepage: http://www.wholewheatradio.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page


Bollocks To Bloodsports, too!

13.05.2007 19:46

Much as I like the expression "Bollocks To Blair", I fear that the distributors of badges and T-shirts with that slogan are, if not the Countryside Alliance itself, then similarly-minded persons who think that molesting wildlife for amusement is all jolly good fun :0(

This belief is based on a TV programme about the hunt ban, where the hunt scum, sorry, "traditional country sportsmen" were all wearing badges with that slogan. I think that the person who got cautioned for the T-shirt was at a country show, so perhaps also hunting fan (sincere apologies if they weren't). Who produced these badges, I don't know, but somehow I can't imagine members of the Little-Trumpleton-on-the-Cludge Foxhounds buying them in bulk from a local anarcho-syndicalist collective.

Does anyone know who actually DID produce these items? Was it a pro-hunting group? Or is there more than one source?

Still, it's an interesting example of a good slogan crossing the political spectrum :0)

Gregor Samsa


Jibbering's musngs

13.05.2007 20:30

Charity

Someone has already explored your dilemna at:  http://jibbering.com/blog/?p=513

Maybe you should make contact with her/him?

Gordon Brown's left Bollock


Typical Alistair Campbelian type of spin

13.05.2007 21:08

It is a motto that has been designed, I believe, to help Blair get away with premeditated mass murder and high treason.

Just like Bliar btw.






styx


thanx!

15.05.2007 15:39

many thanx and i read up that jibbering before and the articles about the pro-hunters and yes, i suspected it was part of a jolly old english coverup.

what a load of bollocks...

still needing to understand what the british translation of bollocks to blair means

instead of bollocks to blair, one would say XXXXXX XXXXXXXX Blair???

please help... in need input

XXX

Charity


A good deal of pedantic bollocks.

16.05.2007 22:41

Apart from checking the obvious sources
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks


You could try looking at other printed publications for their use of the Word Bollock(s)
For example:
 http://library.brown.edu/record=b4097270
On Sale at Amazon
 http://www.amazon.com/Uses-Pair-Bollocks-Summersdale-Humour/dp/1840242388

Also at Amazon:

Bollocks to Alton Towers
Hardcover: 256 pages
Publisher: Michael Joseph Ltd (April 28, 2005)
ISBN-10: 071814791X
ISBN-13: 978-0718147914

The BIGfib Book Of Bollocks - The Best Satire From BIGfib.Com 2005 (Paperback)
Paperback: 100 pages
Publisher: BIGfib Books (December 10, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 2952489939
ISBN-13: 978-2952489935

And Finally

The Little Book of New Labour Bollocks (Paperback)
by Alistair Beaton (Author)
Paperback: 144 pages
Publisher: Pocket Books (October 2, 2000)
ISBN-10: 0743404122
ISBN-13: 978-0743404129

Which interestingly for your purposes is cited by

Why Social Justice Matters (Paperback) by Brian Barry (Author)
Paperback: 328 pages
Publisher: Polity Press (February 1, 2005)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0745629938
ISBN-13: 978-0745629933

in Seven Places

Page 10, Page 129, Page 151, Back Matter (twice) and Index(twice)

Wandering away from printed publications. Bollock is a Family Name.

The calibrated woman: Poems (Unknown Binding) by Margot Bollock
Unknown Binding: 74 pages
Publisher: Thorp Springs Press (1973)
Language: English
ASIN: B0006WC0S2

Which Reprints

The calibrated woman: Poems (Unknown Binding) by Margot Bollock
Publisher: THORP SPRINGS PRESS (1900)
ASIN: B000PVL3XM


Munro Records have the Bollock Brothers as Signed Artists, perhaps they can help.
 munrec@btopenworld.com

And the Media is full of Bollocks:
Little Chicken Productions has Heidi Bollock
 http://www.littlechickenproductions.com/

Perhaps you could persuade two or more members of the Bollock Family to be sworn in as witness, thus
delivering Bollocks to the Court. One presumes, the Bollock family would be affronted should anybody
consider their name to be offensive. she may be contactable via  mkearney@mail.utexas.edu or possibly
directly at  hbollock@mail.utexas.edu

You could ask  slomo@thewax.com if this article is just a put on
 http://www.thewax.com/stilllife/000625.html
or does he really have bollocks for neigbours. They might be amenable and accessible to say their name is not offensive.

Or you could contact Billyan Bollock at the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and ask the same...
Phone Number: (570) 724-4142
Fax Number: (570) 724-1168
E-Mail Address:  bbollock@state.pa.us

Or Wonder how Bollock fares in marriage? What if a Miss Bollock decides to go all double barrelled and Marries a Master Kirker - you get Kirker-Bollock.
 http://www.dailygazette.com/weddingfin.pdf

And Then there is the Norfolk Trader
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/5135150.stm
Whom you already know about
But Didi you know about
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/5082884.stm
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/4768395.stm
Which suggests that prosecutions for "offensive" slogans are not impartially applied.

You could make a Freedom of Information request

This Publication Scheme has been designed to highlight information and publications that are currently available from Norfolk Constabulary. Where information is available on our website, a hypertext link will direct you to the correct page on the website. Where no online version is available, you should apply to:

Freedom of Information Office
Corporate Support Department
Norfolk Constabulary
Operations and Communications Centre
Falconers Chase
Wymondham
Norfolk
NR18 0WW

Or alternatively email:

 FreedomOfInformation@norfolk.pnn.police.uk

When requesting information included in this scheme, please include the following details:

Your name and address
The information or documents you would like to access
The way you would like the information to be sent to you (e.g. hard copy, via email)
Depending on the nature of your request, a fee may be payable.

Just to ask how many offenses happened under the act even if they were not prosecuted. How many successful and how many failed prosecutions and how many appeals (success/fail) there have been for any offensive slogans under the act in the past. It would give you some statistical evidence as to how easily people are offended by these things.


You could maybe talk to a Tee-Shirt designer
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4287446.stm


And Maybe ask here
 http://deputydog.wordpress.com/2007/04/17/right-bollock-for-sale-on-ebay/
if any of the 12 Bidders for a bollock were offended.

Or Retire to the Garden to find the Bollock Family being diligent scientists
 http://www.bihrmann.com/caudiciforms/subs/pet-nat-sub.asp

A pedantic retard


And folks wonder why I love England?

17.05.2007 12:12

The English mind is often brilliant as shows through their wit...

England is the best country in the world in my mind and I'll be dammed if these jackasses are gonna ruin it for my children and everyone elses.

Bollocks to Blair and Bollocks to Brown!

Corporate politics SUCK!

Lib dems and tories are all the same shite, different party.

Can we please have some real democracy grass roots style instead of big business nothing personal hogwash?

XXX

Charity


What Bollocks means to the Ruling Classes.

17.05.2007 18:48

Since you said "Bollocks 2 Blair" how can you gauge if he would be offended? Quite simple, use PIMS and look at Hansard. Search through the Parliamentary record for use of said word.
Which I did. Below are some extracts to give Bollocks in Context. Certainly the number of Lords, MP's and Justices using the word without blushing suggests it is attention seeking nonsense rather than offensive. It is so inoffensive to Government that the only penalty is to be scolded by the Speaker only to be revealed (By Nick Herbert) that it is a sentiment shared by 80% of the population. So, statistically, only 20% of the population could be offended so, on balance of probabilities, a random stranger is unlikely to be offended, distressed outraged or hold any negative sentiment.

My favourite is Lord Onslow suggesting people be given a bollocking for failing to do their job as instructed by their superiors. But that is just a matter of taste.

Go to here
 http://www.parliament.uk/publications/index.cfm
Look at the top right. There is a box labelled "search" Type in bollocks.
Below is a selection of what you can expect to get: Hansard - the daily record of Parliament - and the Minutes of the Committees. I have tried to avoid the vexed "Bollocks to Blair" phrase (although it is in here) to highlight that Bollocks and Bollocking is in regular parlimentary use without censure and for a good number of years. Indeed Lords and Justices use it without blushing.


Joint Committee On Human Rights Minutes of Evidence
Examination of Witnesses (Question 447)
MR JUSTICE HODGE, OBE, MRS NEHAR BIRD AND MISS REBECCA COOPER
5 FEBRUARY 2007
Mr Justice Hodge: I do not really think that is our role. We get asked periodically what our view might be about something. If somebody ever asks about bail we will always say that somebody needs to have another look at it. I am just about to write a letter to the chairman of the Law Commission to say that it would be a very good idea to have a consolidation of the immigration and asylum legislation because it is all over the place. Equally, legal aid is not an area that you are interested in but whenever we are asked about it we say the more people that are represented under legal aid the better we think it is. We cannot really go much further than that. Otherwise, we are trespassing on your and Parliament's toes.

Q447 Earl of Onslow: I caught you talking earlier on, I think, about the delivery of the bail applicant not being very well done. Is there any excuse for this whatsoever? If you say, "I want to hear the appeal at three o'clock on a Tuesday afternoon", why is the person not there? Should they not be given a bollocking for it?

Mr Justice Hodge: The reason they are not there is all to do with the way in which people are moved from detention and prison facilities into the courts and the tribunals. If you had the Home Office in front of you and asked them about delivery contracts, you would have heard how it all operates. We think we are at the bottom of the pecking order so if you have a case at the Old Bailey the van goes there first. Then it comes round to Southwark Crown Court and ends up at the asylum and immigration tribunals in central London. Therefore, they deliver for nine at the Old Bailey and by the time it gets to us it might be a bit late. It is not always the case. We are trying to deal with that by a development of video linking, using the video systems. We are pleased to say that the Home Office have agreed to put video links into the removal centres. We are hopeful that fairly soon we will be able to deal with bail applications by video link. There are quite a lot of practical issues to work out but that would get rid of this delivery problem of getting a person in front of us.



Hansard 18 Jan 2007 : Column 959
Summary justice can also lead to injustice. The Minister knows, because I have raised this matter with him before, that a stallholder at the royal Norfolk show in July 2006 was fined £80 and given a penalty notice for disorder by the police. His offence was that he displayed a T-shirt that the report in The Times said bore the slogan “Bollocks to Blair”.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman about the use of parliamentary language. He has not been in the House very long, but I think that he knows that that is unacceptable.

Nick Herbert: Yes. I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker, for reading out The Times report of the phrase that was used. Perhaps I should paraphrase, and say that the T-shirt bore the slogan “Testicles to the Prime Minister”. The prohibited phrase epitomises a sentiment that is probably shared by 80 per cent. of the general public. It is almost certainly shared by the occupant of No. 11 Downing street, but it apparently constitutes an offence meriting a fine of £80. That is plainly nonsense. If there had been any attempt to take the case to court, it is inconceivable that a sensible magistrate would have convicted the man for wearing the shirt. That shows another danger arising from the increasing use of penalty notices for disorder—that they can lead to injustice, with improper decisions being taken by the police and people effectively being coerced into accepting a ticket rather than run the risk of a prosecution.


Select Committee on Home Affairs Minutes of Evidence
Examination of Witnesses (Question 1135)
TUESDAY 6 JUNE 2006
SIR JOHN GIEVE KCB AND MR STEPHEN BOYS SMITH CB

Q1135 Chairman: I am sure this Committee will acknowledge the areas where there has been real achievement and understand that some of the things that will help, like e-borders, are not yet in place, but if we look at this particular episode of foreign prisoners, there would seem to be two aspects of it which are worrying about the IND as a whole. The first is that the issue itself was not managed, in other words, the problem was enabled to build up over a number of years before action was taken. Secondly, for some reason, the organisation failed to spot this as a problem of real significance not for ministers or politicians but for the public. Those two things together are what have made this a crisis. It seems to me, though it is not for me to put words into your mouth, one of the things the Home Secretary was expressing was a frustration that he cannot be sure that will not happen to him again on some issue as has happened with his predecessors. Why is it the Home Office is not capable of spotting the significance of these problems as they emerge and saying, "We need to deal with this now"?

Sir John Gieve: I do not honestly believe that the Home Office is uniquely bad in this respect. I think the special thing about the Home Office is the political and public salience of the issues, which means that when a thousand cases are mishandled over a number of years in many organisations in the public sector, or even 100,000 cases are mishandled over a number of years in some sectors, they can expect a bollocking in the PAC and hostile coverage on page 6, whereas in the Home Office you know one case mishandled is quite likely to dominate the front pages and the broadcast media for a day or more. That is what is special I think about the Home Office and gives it special risk and it is why the Home Office is particularly important obviously, because the decisions do have that salience. In terms of does the Home Office spot the problems, well, obviously we did not spot this one in time and I regret that very much, in the sense that last autumn we could have taken action which would have forestalled what happened in March. But, on the other hand, we only uncovered this because we were taking action, because we had identified there was a problem with foreign national prisoners and we needed to up our game. It was by doing that that we, if you like, unearthed the failures of the past. Stephen should say something about the Home Office because I have dominated this exchange.



The Earl of Erroll: Hansard 20 Dec 2005 : Column GC250
wait—there always is for a minor injury—by which time it would have been too late to do anything about it. We then rushed him off to Biggleswade Cottage Hospital. The staff there were not allowed to touch the wound. I offered to bring my own needle and sutures as I was in the TA and carry those things in my emergency pack. I also offered to bring my own cleaning kit so that a qualified nurse could use it. But, no, they were not allowed to touch that under rules governing their insurance. In the end I put butterfly stitches in myself and got a bollocking from staff at my son's school two days later who asked why I had not taken him to hospital. It would have been too late by then anyway.





Second Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation
Chairman: Mr. Martyn Jones

†Carmichael, Mr. Alistair (Orkney and Shetland) (LD) †Cohen, Harry (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab) †Garnier, Mr. Edward (Harborough) (Con) †Goggins, Paul (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department) †Heath, Mr. David (Somerton and Frome) (LD) †Herbert, Mr. Nick (Arundel and South Downs) (Con) †Jackson, Mr. Stewart (Peterborough) (Con) †Jones, Mr. David (Clwyd, West) (Con) †Mole, Chris (Ipswich) (Lab) †Pound, Stephen (Ealing, North) (Lab) †Prisk, Mr. Mark (Hertford and Stortford) (Con)†Prosser, Gwyn (Dover) (Lab) †Ryan, Joan (Lord Commissioner of Her Majesty's Treasury)†Snelgrove, Anne (South Swindon) (Lab) †Stoate, Dr. Howard (Dartford) (Lab) †Wareing, Mr. Robert N. (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab) Frank Cranmer, John Gearson, Committee Clerks
Wednesday 12 October 2005 [Mr. Martyn Jones in the Chair] Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (Designated Area) Order 2005

Column Number: 10

Mr. Garnier: The terrible thing is that we simply do not know, and I do not expect the Minister does either. He will probably utter some warm words—he is a nice individual, and I am delighted to see him here—but he
is as much a prisoner of this ludicrous legislation as the rest of us, although he has the unfortunate job of having to justify it.

I am also concerned that if someone were to walk across Parliament square or, more to the point, across Hungerford bridge—a mile down the river—wearing a badge saying something disobliging, they would be caught by the legislation. I use the example of someone who was arrested the other day by a police officer in Chelmsford—I am sorry, in Cheltenham, Gloucestershire—because she had a badge on her coat that said, “Bollocks to Blair”. Is that an arrestable offence? We do not know. If I walk from Waterloo station across the river to the palace with “Bollocks to Blair” on my lapel, I will be caught by this statutory instrument. The whole thing is utterly absurd, and until the Government tell us what they mean by “demonstration”, which is not defined in the Act or in the statutory instrument, they must face the ridicule that they richly deserve.

We are living in strange times, when a Government who pretend to be liberal and to have the interests of the citizen at heart introduce such legislation. The character of this country is changing in a nasty, invidious and dangerous way—day by day we see it. The only pity is, as I said at the beginning of my remarks, that the Government do not have the self-confidence to allow instruments such as this to be debated on the Floor of the House. We are tucked away considering this measure under the negative procedure. It is already the law, Mr. Jones. It is already wrong—or could be wrong—for you to walk from Waterloo station across to the palace with “Bollocks to Blair” on your lapel. It causes me considerable worry on your behalf that you might find that an inconvenience.

The Chairman: I think you should use another example.

Mr. Garnier: The trouble is that there are so many examples that I could use, but this one most starkly demonstrates the terrible nature of the statutory instrument, not because you, Mr. Jones, or I have worn such a badge, but because a young woman has already been arrested for wearing such a badge. So, we do not have to guess what might happen in the future: it has happened already, in that wonderful British country town of Cheltenham.

I promised to be brief, and I shall bring my remarks to an end. I conclude by urging the Committee to have the courage of its democratic principles and to deny the Government the opportunity further to tighten the screw of illiberality and further to tighten the screw on the rights of the citizen to behave in a legitimate way, albeit one that is inconvenient to the Government. I wish the Government to realise that, at least in this Parliament, we will not allow them to ride roughshod over the rights of the individual.


Hunting Bill Standing Committee F Tuesday 25 February 2003 (Morning) [Mr. George Stevenson in the Chair]
New clause 11 Use of dogs below ground

Column Number: 1098
Mr. Foster: Given the last couple of days in the history of the Conservative party, I knew that its members were living in the dark. I did not realise that they were able to see underground, to where the battles between Jack Russell terriers and foxes take place. I will deal with that matter later and if it is not to the satisfaction of the hon. Gentleman I am sure that he will intervene.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex): Bollocks.

Mr. Foster: The word used by the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames), which I happened to hear, was totally unparliamentary. I did not know that the word ''bollocks'' was a parliamentary term, Mr. Stevenson.

The Chairman: Order. Here we are again. I did not hear that if it was said. If I do hear it, I shall take the strongest possible action.

Mr. Foster: Being a former member of the teaching profession does give one more acute hearing than most.

Terrier work is conducted in association with traditional foxhunting. If a fox escapes a hunt into a hole of some sort, terrier men are sent to flush out, bolt, or dig out that fox and have it shot. There is also the sport—and I use the term loosely—of terrier work, where unofficial terrier men will go out and somehow gain pleasure from putting terriers down holes to find


Hansard 11 Apr 2000 : Column 130

Clause 3 has been briefly mentioned. It appears not to go far enough in some respects, but too far in others. It would seem that an 18 year-old hospital nurse could go to prison for kissing a 17 year-old patient, if one reads subsection (4) of Clause 4 in conjunction with Clause 3. Perhaps the Minister will confirm whether that is so when he comes to reply. For the sake of people's children and grandchildren, we shall have to endeavour over the weeks ahead to make this regrettable Bill less dangerous. The general public will expect no less from your Lordships' House.


5.54 p.m.


Lord Selsdon: My Lords, I feel extraordinarily nervous. I wondered why, after so many years in your Lordships' House. I believe that in part it is because I was brought up to believe that one should never use foul language and that if one had a command of the English language, one need never use swear words. The word "buggery", or "bugger", was extraordinarily offensive to me. I tried never to use it.

Last year during Second Reading I asked whether I could use that word. I was told, yes, it was a legal word. At the time I made the point that blasphemy was wrong. I remember that at the school I went to, if people were bowled out just before their 50, they might use foul language. I once said something unholy and was given a complete bollocking by the sports master who said that had I not been bowled out, I would have been dismissed out of hand.


Hansard 21 Oct 2004 : Column 1076

Patrick Mercer (Newark) (Con): Does the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge the outstanding example of the five regiments of foot guards that have served the Crown loyally for 300 years, which will be allowed to retain their identity within the overall formation of the Brigade of Guards? Does he agree that regiments like his and mine, the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment, should be allowed to copy such an example?

Mr. George: I asked the Ministry of Defence to tell me the regiments and the units to which the Army's decision makers belong. I want to be sure that no special favour is given by the great and the good to their regiments. There is no reason why anyone should feel upset. Why bust two battalions in Scotland? They could be added to a Mercian regiment because far more Scots live in England than in Scotland. I do not want any regiment eliminated. It is possible to reach a compromise, and I hope that the Ministry will do that.

We have done much and there are many things that the Ministry is working towards, much of which I applaud, but people do not have to listen to me to find out what is happening. All they have to do is read the report. If the hon. Member for Reigate does that, he will see that we have been critical, and I remain critical. When I was a given a little—what is it called?—interview without coffee—

Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): A bollocking.

Mr. George: Yes, a polite talking to. No names mentioned—

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. The right hon. Gentleman's time is up.

A Repetitive Pedant


How many ways can I say BOLLOCKS?

20.05.2007 12:28

Thank you to those who would treasure our Anglo-Saxon heritage and appreciate the many, many ways an Englishman can say "Bollocks".

What I have found most interesting is that the term "bollocks to" cannot be represented by any other wording within the English language that gives the same meaning.

Follow this train of thought if you will...

"Bollocks to Blair!"

This does not really equate to:
1. testicles to Blair
2. nonsense to Blair
3. round balls to Blair

There is only one way to say "Bollocks 2 Blair" and that is using our beautifully rich literary heritage and the wonderful word "Bollocks".

"Bollocks 2" also does not really equate to:
1. Get stuffed Blair
2. F*ck off Blair
3. F*ck you Blair

"Bollocks 2 Blair" simply means "Bollocks to Blair".

The statements implies that this lying git of a psychopathic war-mongering lunatic is full of shit, he is bringing this great nation of England down in shame for the benefit of the few who profit from killing foreign children for domestic financial gain, ignoring the rule of law with the Attorney General - Lord Goldsmith's blessing, and the English public believe that what he and his corporate democracy of clones represent is sheer unadulterated bullshit and madness.

Where would England be without its bollocks?

The one thing I have learnt in my many years since landing on this rock in 1991 is that the English have bollocks. It is the North American way to bend over for big business, especially in Canada as we are Uncle Sam's bitch and unpaid whore, and destroy democracy while denying human rights.

How the hell could DJ Nicholas Evans state in open court, "There are no Convention Rights!"?

How the hell could DJ Quinten Purdy convict Steve Jago of a serious organised criminal act for displaying a quote from George Orwell, "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." with a straight face?

The Judiciary at City Of Westminster magistrates Courts has lost the plot.

Bollocks to the lot of those wankers - another beautifully English term. We, the people are fed up to the eye teeth with their great circle jerk of nepotism, back scratching, and clear deception of the masses through the lamestream media of propaganda, Orwellian style.

Many thanks to my pedantic friend for your help in resolving the bollocks that is "Big business" government - nothing personal... what a load of bollocks.

P.S. While in court last Friday, how many times did I mention "bollocks" in the courtroom without once being held in contempt of court for "swearing" as the lying b*stard of a DPG idiot stated in his perjured evidence and actions book that I was swearing?

BOLLOCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Charity


Bollocks to Tony Blair

01.07.2007 09:55


If In doubt go with a "Spoonerism"

All Box 2
Bony Tlair


Ian

Ian
mail e-mail: ian_allan05@hotmail.com