Thursday, 2 August 2012

one of our commentators is missing

the following critique of olympiad-apartheid, by spark up!-stablemate don't darken our waters please, we're british, was deleted from a comment-thread entitled oh oh oh what a lovely olympics! on the slog:

"In a nutshell, the Games used to comprise a nationally hosted theatre of amateur-status giants from around the world at their peak."

i hate to demolish your prose-tinted wet-dream of an officers' club jamboree which you probably never had the opportunity of witnessing, but let's face it, i doubt whether many blackies were allowed to take part lest they got above their station and won the white man's medals for pete's sake; except for a team from south africa (which was probably about as blanket-white as it proved in the london 2012 opening ceremony), no black-african nations were represented at all - mainly one suspects, because their fittest fellers had all been shot to buggery by the japs whilst fighting for an ethically-empty empire on the british front-line in burma; germany and japan were barred from entering due to their subjected status as occupied countries (although jerry forced-labour kindly showed-up to construct the facilities) and the soviet union basically boycotted the bastard british burghleyesque for want of commensurate capitalist conviction - however it should be noted that as games-hosts the british team of that era did have the downright decency and good-manners not to bag a brash bonanza of mock-precious-metalware despite having won bronze position in the recently re-run world-war.

i suppose in these modern enlightened times there's some sick sense of sociological progress exhibited in the way we now condone the participation of those we're bombing-to-bloody-blazes, yet in certain reserved events, such as bang-bang- horsey- and water-sports, it still appears that the deeply-darkies don't get a look-in.

having said all this, the individual competitions are nevertheless a lot of fun for those fortunate to make the cut and for those of us who care to turn voyeur - and any that say nay to synchronized-sexuality and pervy-pool-polo are miserable old malignant gits.

god save the olympic-dream

hmmm...john ward, the blog-proprietor in question, has accused the comment-author of levelling a 'personal insult' - well, i can't detect one myself...but if the dunce-cap fits, then wear it you conceited champagne-sipping-socialist-cunt and touchy-two-bit-tosser (combined).  maybe the phrase 'british team' could have been substituted with the snappier 'brits' (thereby avoiding stylistic discrimination of the word 'japs'), but i'm pretty sure that it was more ward's british pride which was wounded rather than his politically-correct conscience.  john ward is most clearly an opportunist olympic-collaborator covertly capitalizing on the politically-corrupted games and does not wish to entertain any hackney-side views delivered from outside the empire-theme-park security-fence.  spark up!-signed scribblers have recently been sincerely, indeed studiously, endeavouring to contribute a deeper-dimension to mr ward's blog, and yet never, in all my years on the internet disco of discourse, have i beheld such a blatantly unambiguous declaration of blog-war.  disgraceful.