Defamatory? Mr Pot, have you met Mr Kettle?

Today I received an email notification that apparently my blog contains "allegedly defamatory content that may violate the rights of others and the laws of their country", note the "alleged" and "may", they are quite important here.

Who could possibly have found me to have "allegedly" broken the law? You guessed it, it's my MP, (not ex-MP) Mr Timbolina Loughton.

Here's the notice:

You will notice that this complaint was sent from "The House of Commons", so it should really be aware that there is no law in this country that prevents me from putting horses heads on a photo, a pillow maybe, but not a photo.

Timmy may find it offensive and distressing, but hey, if he didn't want to be challenged, he shouldn't have stood in parliament and told some extremely unpleasant lies about me. Now he relied on his parliamentary privilege in order to offend me without prosecution, and I'm relying on the malicious communications act in order to offend him without prosecution, and they do say "aint payback a bitch" don't they?

What I'm chuckling about is the potential tabloid story about how the police seized a voodoo doll from my home, and on it's return I then proceeded to replace Timmy's daughters heads with those of horses. That indeed would be a mean trick if I could pull it off, however I merely doctored a photo in order to anonymise (it's not a word I know) his kids identities. This was acceptable to Sussex Police (as documented in various emails I hold regarding this matter and Timmy's attempts to have me prosecuted for suggesting that his kids might look ever so slightly horsie) and under the laws in place in this country, yet old Timmy still thinks it's illegal in some way. Well, it's not, so get used to it.

I am however concerned that I may have broken "Timmy's Law", the new law whereby anything that he does in never illegal, but if anyone else does it, then it clearly must be, so I shall correct what he claims is a defamatory statement in his eyes.

Here's the alleged defamatory statement:

What I meant to say was in fact, "Is daddy an arrogant racist arsehead Dobbin? Yes, he certainly is", I hope that I have now cleared up the misunderstanding.

I obviously wrongly assumed that Loughton's kids didn't think that their father was an arrogant racist arsehead, but I now under stand that this is deemed by Timmy to be defamatory, I must now do the grown up thing and accept that they probably do think that he is an arrogant racist arsehead, just like the rest of the country. I am truly sorry that I thought that they might not agree with the rest of us and support their father and I promise not to make such sweeping assumptions ever again.

If he thinks that this was defamation, then just imagine if I had called him the things that he called me from within his protective bubble, that he assumes gives him immunity from the law. Maybe I'll try that another day, or just feed the truth to the tabloids about his "secret life".

Anyway, in order to show that there are no hard feelings I have now removed the apparently "offensive and distressing" photo montage, and replaced it with an artistic representation of the original, which contains no copyrighted material or any identifying images of his two brats (who in my opinion do look decidedly horsey in the face department) and so clearly is within the law, (just like the other one was, but you have to humour these MPs, you've seen the tantrums thrown by them when they don't get their own way).

Here it is, hope that it reaches the expectations of all laws, both real and imaginary.

There you go, nothing to see here apart from a badly drawn picture of a couple of horse faced slappers, telling a poor quality joke, you can move along now.

ATAB
K